Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of Lifecorder and IDEEA by measuring energy expenditure while walking and running during a field test.
Methods: A total of 14 healthy young adults underwent laboratory tests and field tests. A graded treadmill exercise test was used to determine oxygen consumption and heart rate response to various levels of either walking or running. The relationship between oxygen consumption and heart rate response was used to develop individual regression equations. This indirect measurement of energy expenditure, which was used to estimate the energy expenditure (5 kcal = 1L O2 consumption) by monitoring heart rate response while walking or running a 7km distance, was compared to the energy expenditure measured by either Lifecorder or IDEEA.
Results: No significant difference was noted between the indirect estimation of energy expenditure with either Lifecorder or IDEEA estimations.
Conclusion: Lifecorder was prominently more valid than IDEEA in measuring energy expenditure during daily life exercise as in walking or running.

Keywords: Physical activity, Energy expenditure, Accelerometer

1. 보건복지부. 2007년도 국민건강영양조사.
2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of physical activity, including lifestyle activities among adults-United States, 2000-2001. Morbidity and mortality weekly report 2003;52:764-9.
   
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of no leisure-time physical activity-35 states and the District of Columbia, 1988-2002. Morbidity and mortality weekly report 2004;53:82-6.
   
4. Welk GJ, Almeida J, Morss G. Laboratory calibration and validation of the Biotrainer and Actitrac activity monitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1057-64.
   
5. Tudor-Locke CE, Myers AM. Challenges and oppprtunities for measuring physical activity in sedentary adults. Sports Med 2001;31:91-100.
   
6. Sequeira MM, Rickenbach M, Wietlisbach V, Tullen B, Schutz Y. Physical activity assessment using a pedometer and its comparison with a questionnaire in a large population survey. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:989-99.
   
7. Bassett DR Jr, Strath SJ. Use of pedometers to assess physical activity. In: Physical Activity Assessments for Health-Related Research. Welk GJ, editor. Champaign. IL: Human Kinetics; 2002. p. 163-77.
8. Pambianco G, Wing RR, Robertson R. Accuracy and reliability of the Caltrac accel erometer for estimating energy expenditure. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1990;22:858-62.
   
9. Levine JA, Baukol PA, Westerterp KR. Validation of the Tracmor triaxial accelerometer system for walking. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001;33:1593-7.
   
10. Jakicic JM, Winters C, Lagally K, Ho J, Robertson RJ, Wing RR. The accuracy of the TriTrac-R3D accelerometer to estimate energy expenditure. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1999;31:747-54.
    
11. Zhang K, Pi-Sunyer FX, Boozer CN. Improving energy expenditure estimation for physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004;36:883-9.
    
12. Kumahara H, Schutz Y, Ayabe M, Yoshioka M, Yoshitake Y, Shindo M, et al. The use of uniaxial accelerometry for the assessment of physical-activityrelated energy expenditure: a validation study against whole-body indirect calorimetry. Br J Nutr 2004;91:235-43.
    
13. Foss ML, Keteyian SJ. Fox's physiological basis for exercise and sport. ICHPER J 1998;29:4-8.
14. Andrews RB. Net heart rate as a substitute for respiratory calorimetry. Am J Clin Nutr 1971;24:1139-47.
    
15. Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut M, Bassett DR Jr. Validity of 10 Electronic Pedometers for Measuring Steps, Distance, Energy Cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1455-60.
    
16. Kumahara H, Schutz Y, Ayabe M, Yoshioka M, Yoshitake Y, Shindo M, et al. The use of uniaxial accelerometry for the assessment of physical-activityrelated energy expenditure: a validation study against whole-body indirect calorimetry. Br J Nutr 2004;91:235-43.
    
17. Zhang K, Werner P, Sun M, Pi-Sunyer FX, Boozer CN. Measurement of human daily physical activity. Obes Res 2003;11:33-40.