穿戴式裝置評估登七星山之能量消耗的準確性研究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2019
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
目的：建立小油坑、冷水坑及苗圃步道登七星山主峰的能量消耗資訊並探討穿戴式裝置應用在登山健行能量消耗評估的準確性。方法：10名成年男性 (27.2 ± 4.7歲、175.6 ± 5.3公分、73.3 ± 8.1公斤)，自三條步道登山口健行至七星山主峰後原路折返，所有受試者全程配戴CORTEX METAMAX 3B能量代謝分析儀 (CM3B) 測量能量消耗，同時配戴Garmin Forerunner 235 (小油坑路線) 或Garmin vivoactive 3 (冷水坑和苗圃路線) 光學心率錶記錄光學心率 (OHR) 及搭配胸式心率帶收集胸帶式心率 (HRM)，並估算消耗卡路里。結果：一、小油坑路線：CM3B測得總能量消耗為502.8 ± 76.8大卡，上山時CM3B (333.1 ± 40.5大卡) 與HRM (361.8 ± 45.0大卡) 無顯著差異，但皆顯著低於OHR (391.1 ± 37.1大卡；p< .05)，下山時HRM (223.1 ± 66.3大卡) 與OHR (253.7± 58.5大卡) 皆顯著高於CM3B (169.7 ± 44.2大卡)；二、冷水坑路線：CM3B測得總能量消耗為708.0 ± 104.5大卡，且CM3B無論在上山/下山 (464.3 ± 63.8 / 243.7 ± 45.3大卡)，皆顯著低於HRM (553.4 ± 109.8 / 316.3 ± 81.5大卡) 及OHR (592.8 ± 127.3 / 357.7 ± 101.5大卡)；三、苗圃路線：CM3B測得總能量消耗為834.0 ± 134.7大卡，上山時CM3B (583.9 ± 99.2大卡) 與HRM (641.7 ± 122.2大卡) 無顯著差異，兩者皆顯著低於OHR (710.9 ± 117.6大卡)，下山時HRM (377.3 ± 91.6大卡) 與OHR (432.5 ± 87.6大卡) 皆顯著高於CM3B (250.1 ± 41.1大卡)。在心率部分，三條路線在上山時OHR與HRM測得之平均心率皆無顯著差異；下山時僅小油坑OHR測得之平均心率顯著高於HRM。結論：完成三條登七星山主峰步道全程可消耗卡路里503大卡 (小油坑)、708大卡 (冷水坑) 及834大卡 (苗圃)，而使用穿戴式光學心率錶進行能量消耗估計時，無論上、下山皆會顯著高估能量消耗，又以下山時估計的誤差較大。
Purpose: Established the energy expenditure information of the Mt. Qixing Xiaoyoukeng, Lengshuikeng and Miaopu Trail and assess the accuracy of the wearable devices in the energy consumption assessment of hiking. Methods: 10 adult males (27.2 ± 4.7 years old, 175.6 ± 5.3 cm, 73.3 ± 8.1 kg), hike from three trail to the main peek of Mt. Qixing, then return with the same route with CORTEX METAMAX 3B (CM3B) for energy consumption, Garmin Forerunner 235 (Xiaoyoukeng Trail) and Garmin vivoactive 3 (Lengshuikeng and Miaopu Trail) with heart rate monitor (HRM) and Optical heart rate (OHR) estimated calories burned. Results: Xiaoyoukeng Trail, The total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 502.8 ± 76.8 kcal, CM3B (333.1 ± 40.5 kcal) and HRM (361.8 ± 45.0 kcal) were not significantly different when going uphill, but OHR (391.1 ± 37.1 kcal) was significantly higher than the other two devices; HRM (223.1 ± 66.3 kcal) and OHR (253.7 ± 58.5 kcal) were significantly higher than CM3B (169.7 ± 44.2 kcal) when going downhill. Lengshuikeng Trail, the total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 708.0 ± 104.5 kcal. Both uphill or downhill, CM3B (463.3 ± 63.8 / 243.7 ± 45.2 kcal) were significant lower than HRM (553.4 ± 109.8 / 316.3 ± 81.5 kcal) and OHR (592.8 ± 127.3 / 357.7 ± 101.5 kcal). Miaopu Trail , the total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 834.0 ± 134.7 kcal. CM3B (583.9 ± 99.2 kcal) and HRM (641.7 ± 122.2 kcal) were not significantly different when going uphill, but OHR (710.9 ± 117.6 kcal) was significantly higher than the other two devices. HRM (377.3 ± 91.6 kcal) and OHR (432.5 ± 87.6 kcal) were significantly higher than CM3B (250.1 ± 41.1 kcal) when going downhill. As the heart rate, there was no significant difference in HRM when going uphill; OHR was significantly higher than HRM when going downhill in Xiaoyoukeng Trail. Conclusions: From three trail to Mt. Qixing main peak, the whole process can consume about 503 kcal (Xiaoyoukeng Trail), 708 kcal (Lengshuikeng Trail) and 834 kcal (Miaopu Trail), the wearable device with optical heart rate significantly overestimates the energy expenditure of hiking. Among them, and the deviation of downhill is higher.
Purpose: Established the energy expenditure information of the Mt. Qixing Xiaoyoukeng, Lengshuikeng and Miaopu Trail and assess the accuracy of the wearable devices in the energy consumption assessment of hiking. Methods: 10 adult males (27.2 ± 4.7 years old, 175.6 ± 5.3 cm, 73.3 ± 8.1 kg), hike from three trail to the main peek of Mt. Qixing, then return with the same route with CORTEX METAMAX 3B (CM3B) for energy consumption, Garmin Forerunner 235 (Xiaoyoukeng Trail) and Garmin vivoactive 3 (Lengshuikeng and Miaopu Trail) with heart rate monitor (HRM) and Optical heart rate (OHR) estimated calories burned. Results: Xiaoyoukeng Trail, The total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 502.8 ± 76.8 kcal, CM3B (333.1 ± 40.5 kcal) and HRM (361.8 ± 45.0 kcal) were not significantly different when going uphill, but OHR (391.1 ± 37.1 kcal) was significantly higher than the other two devices; HRM (223.1 ± 66.3 kcal) and OHR (253.7 ± 58.5 kcal) were significantly higher than CM3B (169.7 ± 44.2 kcal) when going downhill. Lengshuikeng Trail, the total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 708.0 ± 104.5 kcal. Both uphill or downhill, CM3B (463.3 ± 63.8 / 243.7 ± 45.2 kcal) were significant lower than HRM (553.4 ± 109.8 / 316.3 ± 81.5 kcal) and OHR (592.8 ± 127.3 / 357.7 ± 101.5 kcal). Miaopu Trail , the total energy expenditure measured by CM3B was 834.0 ± 134.7 kcal. CM3B (583.9 ± 99.2 kcal) and HRM (641.7 ± 122.2 kcal) were not significantly different when going uphill, but OHR (710.9 ± 117.6 kcal) was significantly higher than the other two devices. HRM (377.3 ± 91.6 kcal) and OHR (432.5 ± 87.6 kcal) were significantly higher than CM3B (250.1 ± 41.1 kcal) when going downhill. As the heart rate, there was no significant difference in HRM when going uphill; OHR was significantly higher than HRM when going downhill in Xiaoyoukeng Trail. Conclusions: From three trail to Mt. Qixing main peak, the whole process can consume about 503 kcal (Xiaoyoukeng Trail), 708 kcal (Lengshuikeng Trail) and 834 kcal (Miaopu Trail), the wearable device with optical heart rate significantly overestimates the energy expenditure of hiking. Among them, and the deviation of downhill is higher.
Description
Keywords
心跳率, 卡路里, 攝氧量, 光學心率, heart rate, calories, oxygen consumption, optical heart rate