Comparison of ACSM Metabolic Equations and Energy Consumption Equipments during Walking and Running of College Students

PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to compare the differences between ACSM equation and energy expedition equipment of college students during walking and running, and to analyze the correlation. METHODS The subjects were 36 college students (19 male, 17 female) and they performed walking (4 km/hr, 2%) and running (9.0 km/hr, 2%) for 10 minutes. Energy consumption was measured using ACSM equation, Caltrac, Polar, Omron, Lifecorder, and Pacer. The paired t-test, correlation and ANOVA were conducted. RESULTS For GEE, all 3 equipments overestimated from 116.1% to 123.4% (p<.01) and showed a significant correlation with ACSM equation in walking. Polar was showing similarly, Polar and Lifecorder showed a significant correlation with ACSM equation in running. Considering the mean comparison, Lifecorder was the most similar in walking, Polar in running, and both showed significant correlation. For NEE, only Caltrac was similar with ACSM equation in walking, Caltrac and Pacer were similar in running, but both Caltrac and Pacer didn’t have significant correlation. Omron and Pacer were relatively similar with ACSM equation in walking. All of equipment had large errors or lower correlation in running. CONCLUSIONS Compared to ACSM equation, Caltrac and Polar were slightly overestimated, while the Pedometer was similar to for walking but very underestimated for running. The 5 of 7 cases showed significant correlations in walking, and only Polar and Lifecorder showed significant correlations in running. Therefore, it is necessary to verify the validity of the equipments continuously.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.