Comparison of Indirect Calorimetry- and Accelerometry-Based Energy Expenditure during Object Project Skill Performance. Issue 2 (3rd April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sacko, Ryan S.; Brazendale, Keith; Brian, Ali; McIver, Kerry; Nesbitt, Danielle; Pfeifer, Craig; Stodden, David F.
• Is Part Of: Measurement in physical education and exercise science. Volume 23:Issue 2(2019)
• Page Start: 148
• Page End: 158
• Publication Date: 2019-04-03
• Subjects: Physical activity -- physical education -- metabolism -- motor control -- measurement; Physical fitness -- Testing -- Periodicals; Physical education and training -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Physical education and training -- Research -- Periodicals; 613.7
• DOI: 10.1080/1091367X.2018.1554578
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1091-367X

Abstract

ABSTRACT: This study compared the energy expenditure (EE) levels during object projection skill performance (OPSP) as assessed by indirect calorimetry and accelerometry. Thirty-four adults (female n = 18) aged 18–30 (23.5 ± 2.5 years) performed three, 9-min sessions of kicking, over-arm throwing, and striking performed at 6-, 12-, and 30-sec intervals. EE was estimated (METS) using indirect calorimetry (COSMED K4b2) and hip-worn accelerometry (ActiGraph GT3X+). EE using indirect calorimetry demonstrated moderate-intensity physical activity (3.4 ± 0.7 METS––30-sec interval, 5.8 ± 1.2 METS––12-sec interval) to vigorous intensity physical activity (8.3 ± 1.7 METS––6-sec interval). However, accelerometry predicted EE suggested only light-intensity physical activity (1.7 ± 0.2 METS––30-sec interval, 2.2 ± 0.4 METS––12-sec interval, 2.7 ± 0.6 METS––6-sec interval). Hip-worn, ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometers do not adequately capture physical activity intensity levels during OPSP, regardless of differences in skill performance intervals.