Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Medical Engineering & Physics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/medengphy

Activity classification using a single chest mounted tri-axial accelerometer

A. Godfrey a,∗ , A.K. Bourke b,c,d , G.M. Ólaighin b,c , P. van de Ven d , J. Nelson d
a
Clinical Ageing Research Unit, Newcastle University, Campus for Ageing & Vitality, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE4 5PL, United Kingdom
b
School of Engineering & Informatics, NUI Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland
c
National Centre for Biomedical Engineering Science, NUI Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland
d
Wireless Access Research Group, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Accelerometer-based activity monitoring sensors have become the most suitable means for objective
Received 29 November 2010 assessment of mobility trends within patient study groups. The use of minimal, low power, IC (integrated
Received in revised form 3 May 2011 circuit) components within these sensors enable continuous (long-term) monitoring which provides
Accepted 6 May 2011
more accurate mobility trends (over days or weeks), reduced cost, longer battery life, reduced size and
weight of sensor. Using scripted activities of daily living (ADL) such as sitting, standing, walking, and
Keywords:
numerous postural transitions performed under supervised conditions by young and elderly subjects, the
Physical activity
ability to discriminate these ADL were investigated using a single tri-axial accelerometer, mounted on the
Accelerometer
Gyroscope
trunk. Data analysis was performed using Matlab® to determine the accelerations performed during eight
Discrete wavelet transform different ADL. Transitions and transition types were detected using the scalar (dot) product technique and
ADL vertical velocity estimates on a single tri-axial accelerometer was compared to a proven discrete wavelet
Postural transitions transform method that incorporated accelerometers and gyroscopes. Activities and postural transitions
Scalar product were accurately detected by this simplified low-power kinematic sensor and activity detection algorithm
Dot product with a sensitivity and specificity of 86–92% for young healthy subjects in a controlled setting and 83–89%
for elderly healthy subjects in a home environment.
Crown Copyright © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IPEM. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction during daily activities involving locomotion and postural changes

The study of ambulatory human motion with accelerom-
eter and (or) gyroscope-based mobility monitors has become
increasingly extensive in many areas of biomedical electronic
research. These research areas include the monitoring of the
patients (old and young) suffering from: falls, Parkinson’s dis-
ease, venous ulceration, back pain, osteoarthritis, mental disorders,
obesity, etc. [1–9]. Reduction in sensor size and cost [10] cou-
pled with more powerful data mining techniques has enabled the
researcher to apply both single and multiple sensor arrays to these
groups.
Coley et al. [11] adopted the use of a single gyroscope sensor
to study shank kinematics during stair ascent/decent and walking
compared to a reference motion capture system. A negative peak
was observed during level walking and stair descent. The system
returned a relative error of <8% in identifying periods of stair ascent
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 191 248 1245.
E-mail addresses: alan.godfrey@newcastle.ac.uk, alan.godfrey@ncl.ac.uk
(A. Godfrey).
[11]. However, the use of this system incorporated a complex
wavelet approximation algorithm and while only one sensor (gyro-
scope) was used its power consumption was still quite substantial
at 4 mA, which limited its recording period to 12-h. Another sys-
tem incorporating gyroscopes for fall detection have used multiple
gyroscope sensor configurations with individual power consump-
tion of up to 6 mA (milliampere) each [12].
Previous ambulatory systems utilising just accelerometers have
also been researched [13–15]. Karantonis et al. [14] adopted the
use of a single tri-axial accelerometer at the waist for the detec-
tion between periods of activity and rest, postural orientation,
walking and falls. The authors also aimed to provide a distinction
between the upright postures of sitting and standing based on tilt
angle differences [14]. However, this method is based on prede-
termined thresholds and as a result Karantonis et al. found that
subjects could either be sitting or standing, depending on various
other parameters (the type of accelerometers used by these authors
had high power consumption, >4 mA). Laboratory testing carried
out by these authors involved six subjects resulted in an overall
accuracy of 90.8% across 12 tasks (283 tests) across a variety of
movements [14]. Godfrey et al. [16] undertook a comprehensive

1350-4533/$ – see front matter. Crown Copyright © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of IPEM. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.05.002
1128 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135

Recently, research has been carried out into investigating if

Fig. 1. Site of sensor attachment on the chest.
accurate mobility monitoring and activity classification, includ-
ing posture transition (without the need for thresholds) can be
achieved using a single chest mounted sensor [17]. The sensor
used in that study by Najafi et al. [17] consisted of a bi-axial
accelerometer (current consumption 0.6 mA × 1) and single axis
gyroscope (4.5 mA). The authors achieved high accuracies but the
resulting activity algorithm was complex and computationally
intensive.
The aim of this pilot study is to determine, if using a
single trunk mounted low power tri-axial accelerometer, can
sufficient and accurate detection of postural activity (PA) and
posture transition (PT) be achieved from a less complex activ-
ity algorithm. Once these have been detected, PTs will help
in determining the type of activity and also better assist
in understanding the problems occurring during daily activity
(falls, postural stability, etc.) [17]. The improved arrangement
would:

review of accelerometry and its application for human movement (a) provide a more straightforward, low power sensor array (one
and activity detection. The authors direct the readers to that body tri-axial accelerometer) and
of work where earlier systems and their description, accuracy, etc. (b) a reduction in the computational intensity of the activity clas-
are presented. sification algorithm.

Fig. 2. A flow chart summarizing the VESPA algorithm. This new algorithm eliminates the need for complex computations on gyroscope signals to eliminate drift introduced
by integration. Simple vertical velocity estimates and scalar products provide a complete activity monitoring system on a single accelerometer-based sensor.
 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135 1129

Fig. 3. (i) sin() after applying the DWT with decomposition into 9 scales by a fifth order Coiflet wavelet (coif5). (ii) Original vertical acceleration signal (avs ). (a, iii) DWT(avs )
between the scales of 5 and 9 with a coif5 wavelet. The circles (green) represent the detection of the type of transition, here it is a SiSt. The nearest maximum and minimum
to the time of posture transition tPT . (b, iii) Similar analysis/technique as (a, iii) but here showing a StSi. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the
reader is referred to the web version of the article.)

2. Methods subject were recorded during each activity. The inertial sensor con-
sists of a tri-axial accelerometer sensor, consisting of two bi-axial
2.1. Sensor design Analog Devices ADXL2101 accelerometers which are sensitive to

In this study, the sagittal, frontal and transverse accelerations as

well as pitch, yaw and roll angular velocities of the trunk, of each 1
ADXL210 and ADXRS300, Analog Devices BV, Limerick, Ireland.
1130 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135

both static and dynamic acceleration with a range of ±10 g and

consumes less than 0.6 mA each. The inertial sensor also included a
tri-axial gyroscope sensor consisting of 3 uni-axial Analog Devices
ADXSRS3001 rate gyroscopes. The ADXRS3001 is capable of mea-
suring angular velocities in the range ±300◦ s−1 and provides an
analog output voltage with a current consumption of 6 mA. This
inertial sensor was positioned on the sternum, Fig. 1.
A portable battery-powered data-logger (Biomedical
MonitoringBM422 ) was used for data acquisition and attached
at the subject’s waist by means of a belt attachment. The sensor
signals were recorded at a frequency of 1000 Hz (hertz) and
resolution of 12 bits. Each signal was low-pass filtered using a
second-order low-pass Butterworth two-pass digital filter, with a
cut-off frequency of 17-Hz.
The sensor arrangement (sensor held both accelerometers and
gyroscopes) allowed for more efficient data collection. Once the
scripted activities were performed, accelerometer and gyroscope
data from the sensor were downloaded from the data logger
and analysed with a specially written Matlab® program. The
accelerometer data collected were to be analysed separately by
both methods (newly proposed algorithm and that used by Najafi
et al. [17]) for direct comparison. The following section describes
in more detail how the data were collected and analysed.

2.2. Experimental design

The experimental design consists of two stages:

Firstly, the chest-mounted sensor was evaluated on young
healthy subjects (YHS). This involved the testing and compari-
son of a new single tri-axial accelerometer activity algorithm to
a proven method of activity and postural transition detection using
accelerometers and gyroscopes [17]. Previously, the proven (ref-
erence) method, performed over 349 PTs, achieved a sensitivity3
and specificity4 of 93% and 82% for sit-to-stand (SiSt) and 82% and
94% for stand-to-sit (StSi) transitions, respectively. Sensitivities and
specificities were, respectively, 90.2% and 93.4% in sitting, 92.2%
and 92.1% in “standing + walking” and finally 98.4% and 99.7% in
lying.
Secondly, once the new technique was compared against the Fig. 4. (a) DWT of the vertical acceleration (avs ), the green ‘’ represents the peaks
corresponding to actual walking steps. The red ‘’ corresponds to peaks that were
reference method, the single tri-axial accelerometer sensor and
excluded, as they were less than the timing criteria as outlined by Najafi et al.
new algorithm was tested on elderly healthy subjects (EHS) in their (<0.25 s) to be considered as steps. (b) Vertical velocity estimate obtained during
home environment. a period of walking for a YHS. The green ‘’ represents the peaks corresponding to
Stage 1: Ten YHS were recruited. These young adults ranged in actual walking steps. No spurious peaks were detected. (For interpretation of the
age from 21 to 29 years (23.7 ± 2.2 years). All gave written informed references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of
the article.)
consent and the University of Limerick Research Ethics Committee
(ULREC) approved the protocol. All subjects wore an ambulatory
recording system that included the kinematic sensor attached to • a6: sitting down on and standing up from a bed, (height
the chest. Each subject performed 8 different activities of daily liv- 53.5 ± 1.8 cm);
ing (ADL), where each was repeated a total of 3 times at their own • lying down and standing up from a bed, (height 53.5 ± 1.8 cm);
pace, under the supervision of one of the study investigators. These • walking 10 m.
activities included:
These activities were to be detected using a previously validated
• a1: sitting down and standing up from an arm-chair, (height method [17] and the new classification algorithm (VESPA), as pro-
42.6 ± 1.1 cm); posed in this paper. The postural transition duration time for each
• a2: sitting down and standing up from a kitchen chair, (height transition was also calculated and compared for the two methods
46.2 ± 1.0 cm); within this age group (results Fig. 6(a) and (b)).
• a3: sitting down and standing up from a toilet seat, (height Stage 2: Upon the completion of Stage 1, ten EHS performed
43.0 ± 0.8 cm); the same ADL procedures as the young adults, under the super-
• a4: sitting down and standing up from a low stool, (height vision of one of the study investigators, in their own homes.
39.2 ± 1.5 cm); These were community-dwelling elderly subjects, 3 female and
• a5: getting in and out of a car seat, (height 52.0 ± 1.7 cm); 7 male, were monitored. They ranged in age from 70 to 83 years
(77.2 ± 4.3 years). All subjects gave written informed consent and
the ULREC approved the measurement protocol. However, these
2
Biomedical Monitoring Ltd., Glasgow, Scotland.
elderly subjects wore only the kinematic sensor equipped with a
3
Measures proportion of actual positives which are correctly identified. single tri-axial accelerometer (ADXL210 × 2). The purpose of this
4
Measures proportion of negatives which are correctly identified. stage, is to show that the validity of the new Velocity Estimate
 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135 1131

Fig. 5. (i) This the calculation of  from the scalar (dot) product (a• b) of the static vector, a, and the tri-axial accelerometer output, b, for change in body tilt – SiSt or StSi.
(ii) Original vertical acceleration signal (avs ). (a) SiSt transition for a YHS – for comparison with Fig. 3(a) – shows the potential of the new VESPA algorithm over the previous
method. (iii) Vertical estimate for the transition of SiSt – greater maximum positive peak in vertical estimate, |b| > |a| (a and b determined from t(PT) – nearest maxima). (b)
StSi transition for a YHS – for comparison with Fig. 3(b). (iii) Vertical estimate for the transition of StSi – greater maximum negative peak in vertical estimate, |a| > |b| (a and
b determined from t(PT) – nearest maxima).
1132 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135

Fig. 6. (i) Posture duration (TD) times standing to sitting (StSi) for young healthy subjects as determined by both methods for PTs (mean with standard error). (ii) Posture
duration (TD) times for sitting to standing (SiSt) young healthy subjects as determined by both methods for PTs (mean with standard error). (iii) Standing to sitting (StSi) and
sitting to standing transition (SiSt) duration times for elderly healthy subjects as determined by the VESPA algorithm (mean with standard error).

and Scalar Product Activity (VESPA) algorithm on EHS where their
movement or postural transition signatures (pattern) may differ
from YHS.
2.3. Calibration
Calibration of the tri-axial accelerometer and gyroscope sen-
sors was performed using previous methods as outlined by Bourke
et al. [4]. The method of gyroscope calibration works by comparing
the standard deviation of three gyroscope signals to a 3-element
Gyroscope Static Threshold Vector (GSTV). The GSTV elements are
the mean and standard deviation of each axis of the tri-axial gyro-
scope held static for a period of 5 s [18]. Accelerometer calibration is
performed by subjecting the accelerometer to a number of known
static angles versus gravity [19].
2.4. Signal processing
The methods used to determine the subject’s activity were the
use of multi-resolution analysis in the form of the discrete wavelet
transform (for comparison purposes) and the new VESPA algo-
rithm.
2.4.1. The discrete wavelet transform
The purpose of the discrete wavelet transform (DWT) is a
time-frequency representation of a signal. The DWT owes its
 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135 1133

Table 1
Sensitivity and specificity of PT and walking for the 10 YHS and 10 EHS using VESPA and the method by Najafi et al. (mean ± standard deviation).

VESPA Total PT Sensitivity (%) Specificity (%)

StSi SiSt Lying Walking StSi SiSt

YHS (N = 10) 42 ± 0 92 ± 9 85 ± 11 100 ± 0 100 ± 0 85 ± 11 92 ± 9

EHS (N = 10) 42 ± 0 89 ± 8 83 ± 11 100 ± 0 98 ± 1 83 ± 11 89 ± 8
Najafi et al. [17]
YHS (N = 6) 57 ± 9 82 ± 15 93 ± 7 100 ± 0 96 ± 1 94 ± 6 82 ± 15
EHS (N = 9) Not reported

functionality to the fast pyramid algorithm [20,21]. The pyramid
algorithm has both forward and backward (inverse) algorithms to
compute the wavelet transform. The backward algorithm recon-
structs the original signal from the component wavelets [21]. The
DWT is given in Eq. (1) in terms of its recovery transform, where
d(k,l) is a sampling of the wavelet coefficients at discrete points k
and l with the mother wavelet, [20]:

∞

∞ n
2.4.3. VESPA algorithm – scalar product
This paper proposes a new method for trunk angle tilt estimation
using a tri-axial accelerometer mounted at the chest. This novel
method makes use of the scalar (dot) product. This method deals
with vector multiplication as is defined by Eq. (3), where a, is a row
vector and b is a column vector of equal length.
⎡ ⎤
b1

x(t) = d(k, )2−k/2 (2−k t − ) (1) a · b = [a1 · · ·an ] ⎣ .. ⎦

= al bl = a1 b1 + · · · + an bn (3)
.
bn l=1
k=−∞=−∞

Here we apply the same techniques adopted by Najafi et al. to
validate the new algorithm of activity monitoring with the use of
a single tri-axial accelerometer – VESPA. Use of the DWT by Najafi
et al. was two-fold:
(a) Firstly, DWT (with a suitable mother wavelet between the
required frequency bands/scales) eliminated low frequency
drift which resulted when the gyroscope signal was integrated
to determine change of trunk tilt ().
For angle tilt detection the vector a, is a 1 × 3 matrix rep-
resenting the mean output value from each axis of the tri-axial
accelerometer during which the patient is standing and inactive.
Similarly, b, is a 3 × N matrix, which represents the accelerometer
output for each axis, where N denotes the length of the accelerom-
eter signal, over the entire recording period. The scalar product of
a and b is represented in Eq. (4). Thus, the resulting vector, or angle
tilt (), is a 1 × N matrix represented in Eq. (5). The value represents
the angle difference away from the static vector, a:
(b) Secondly, the DWT was applied to the vertical acceleration  
(avs ) to determine the type of postural transition (StSi or SiSt) b11 b12 ··· b1N
transition. A combination of these techniques subsequently a · bN = [a1 , a2 , a3 ] b21 b22 ··· b2N
determined the time, t(PT), and duration of the postural transi- b31 b32 ··· b3N
tions, TD [17].
The wavelet toolbox of Matlab® was used to calculate the dif-
ferent wavelet transforms used in this study.
2.4.2. VESPA algorithm – velocity estimate
(5)
bN
It has previously been suggested by Degen et al. [22] and Bourke
et al. [23] that velocity estimates provide an approximation most
similar to velocity profiles. This can be derived from a tri-axial
accelerometer (TA) by numerical integration of the norm of the
TA signals after the magnitude of static acceleration (gravity) is
subtracted, Eq. (2):
   presented in Fig. 2. It is proposed that the use of this scalar prod-
−2
vve = a2x + a2y + a2z − 9.81 ms dt
Degen et al. [22] removed drift from the signal by applying a
multiplication factor of 0.9 (damping factor) to the positive acceler-
ation values during integration. Kangas et al. [13] removed drift by
subtracting a high-pass filtered root-sum-of-squares signal prior to
integration and only integrating over a short period (the pit before
the impact). However, Bourke et al. [23] removed integration drift
by band-pass filtering the vertical profiles using a 2nd order Butter-
worth band-pass filter with upper and lower cut-off frequency of
15 Hz and 0.15 Hz respectively as it produced more accurate results.
Similarly, this method is adopted in this study.
The vertical velocity estimate (vve ) was used to detect walking
and to differentiate between the postural transition of StSi or SiSt.
If the absolute value of the negative peak around t(PT) was greater
than the absolute value of the positive peak, the transition was
deemed to be StSi. The opposite was the case for SiSt, see Fig. 5(a)
and (b).
 N

3 
3
= al bln · · · al blN (4)
l=1 l=1 n=1
(a · bN )
N = cos−1
|a| ·
The scalar product of the accelerometer signal results in the
change of trunk tilt of the wearer. This method was compared
directly with the method adopted by Najafi et al. [17] for activ-
ity classification. A full representation of the VESPA algorithm is
(2) uct method will provide a more simple and straightforward activity
algorithm for the detection of sitting to standing and standing to sit-
ting transitions. The added benefit is that this algorithm can be used
on inertial sensors that incorporate a single tri-axial accelerometer,
thus eliminating the need for gyroscopes. Practically this leads to
a simple sensor design and will prolong the activity measurement
capabilities of inertial sensors as gyroscopes draw more power from
batteries.
3. Results
3.1. Stage 1 (YHS): discrete wavelet transform validation
Lying was detected by the orientation of the vertical accelerom-
eter axis (avs ) with a sensitivity of 100%. In the lying state the
accelerometer axis measures 0g (g = gravity, 9.81 ms−2 ) while in the
standing or sitting state the value is approximately –1g. Fig. 3(a) and
(b) shows the resulting postural transition signals achieved from
1134 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135

Table 2 posture transition (these duration times are presented in Fig. 6(a)
Step count for a chest mounted device determined by (a) DWT method (Najafi et al.)
and (b)).
applied to the vertical acceleration (avs ) and (b) VESPA derived step count from the
vertical estimate.

Subject DWT(avs ): YHSa VESPA: YHSa VESPA: EHSb

3.3. Stage 2 (EHS): application of VESPA in a home environment
1 23 16 26
2 28 26 27 Having obtained satisfactory results in Stage 1, the kinematic
3 32 26 21
sensor with a single tri-axial accelerometer was applied to an
4 35 33 24
5 38 35 11 elderly healthy group within their home environment for concept
6 25 25 23 testing. Here the elderly subjects performed the same activities
7 30 28 15 as the young subjects. Lying was detected with a sensitivity of
8 27 31 51
100%. StSi was detected with a sensitivity and specificity of 89%
9 24 25 29
10 35 34 26
and 83%, while SiSt had a sensitivity and specificity of 83% and 89%
Total 297 279 253 respectively. Table 1 shows the overall sensitivity and specificity of
a transition detection for the 10 EHS. Walking was identified with an
YHS = Young Healthy Subjects.
b
EHS = Elderly Healthy Subjects – this was a self-selected distance chosen by the accuracy of 100% over an unmeasured controlled distance and the
patient. total number of steps recorded, Table 2. Posture duration times are
presented in Fig. 6(c).

standing up (SiSt transition, Fig. 3(a)) and sitting down (StSi tran-
sition, Fig. 3(b)) from a kitchen chair for a young healthy subject
by the application of the DWT and methodology adopted by Najafi
et al.
As discussed by Najafi et al. the nearest positive and negative
peaks of DWT(avs ) to the local minimum point of sin() were chosen
to represent the transition of StSi and SiSt. In total there were 360
PTs performed by the study subjects with a sensitivity and speci-
ficity of 92% and 88% for StSi and 89% and 93% for SiSt respectively
(these findings were similar to that achieved by Najafi et al.).
Walking was detected by applying the DWT to avs between the
scales of 2 and 5 using a Daubechies mother wavelet of order 4 (db4)
[24]. A threshold was then applied to the negative peaks of the sig-
nal, Fig. 4(a) [17]. Walking was correctly identified by this method
with an accuracy of 100%. The total number of steps detected is
presented in Table 2.
Posture transition durations (TD) were also calculated from
sin() as a measure of time between the two successive peaks, P1
and P2 , around the time of posture transition (tPT ), Eq. (6) [25]:
TD = t(P1 ) − t(P2 )
The posture transition duration times for both methods (Najafi
method and VESPA) are presented in Figs. 3 and 5.
3.2. Stage 1 (YHS): VESPA
Lying was detected by the VESPA algorithm from the angle mea-
sured (trunk tilt, ) by the tri-axial accelerometer of the vertical
accelerometer axis (avs ) with a sensitivity of 100%. Fig. 5(a) (SiSt)
and (b) (StSi) shows the resulting postural detection method, simi-
lar to that adopted by Najafi et al. but applied to the scalar product
method. However, in this study both types of transitions were dis-
tinguished using vve . This was achieved by examining the maximum
positive and negative peak values of the vve around the time of a
postural transition (t(PT)). A greater maximum positive peak value
with a SiSt transition (Fig. 5(a, part iii)) and a greater maximum
negative peak value was associated with a StSi transition (Fig. 5(b,
part iii)). Of the 360 PTs performed by the young adults, sensitivity
and specificity were 92% and 86% for StSi and 86% and 92% for SiSt
respectively for VESPA. Table 1 shows the overall sensitivity and
specificity of transition detection for the 10 YHS.
Walking was detected with an accuracy of 100% by examining
the negative peaks of the vertical velocity estimate, Fig. 4(b). The
step estimation is compared to the method adopted by Najafi et al.
in Table 2. Postural duration times were also calculated for VESPA
based on similar peak detection during the time of a detected
4. Discussion and conclusion
Previous activity classification studies have focused on the mul-
tiple sensor arrangements but this often involved more complex
algorithm development to determine the correct activity. More
recent studies have incorporated single site sensor attachment,
however, those sensors incorporated more high-power devices,
(such as gyroscopes) thereby limiting the monitoring duration
capability and offline analysis of the study (due to complex algo-
rithms). Clinically, the application of body worn sensors without
the possibility of long term patient monitoring can be limiting due
to the added burden/cost placed upon patients and researchers to
replace sensors and/or batteries. While modern day sensors with a
single site of body attachment can record for up to seven or more
days, their activity detection algorithms can be minimal due to their
need to save battery life. The aim of this pilot study was to show
that a suitable low-power device with a more complete and uncom-
plicated activity classification algorithm was possible with a single
chest worn tri-axial accelerometer device.
(6) The single tri-axial accelerometer kinematic sensor and sim-
plified activity algorithm was compared directly with a proven
sensor configuration worn on the chest (incorporating a bi-axial
accelerometer and uni-axial gyroscope) that utilised a more com-
plicated activity algorithm. Firstly, the proven activity detection
technique was replicated successfully and was found to have suffi-
cient accuracy with the test group, young healthy adults (YHS) for
the activities performed, Fig. 3. The activities of lying, standing, sit-
ting, walking, and postural transitions (StSi and SiSt) were detected
with success rates similar to those of Najafi et al. [17]. The new
sensor arrangement and simplified algorithm (classified as VESPA)
were then applied to the same activities as performed by the YHS.
The data is presented in Figs. 4(b) and 5 for direct comparison to
Figs. 3 and 4(a) which show the potential for the new system con-
figuration and activity algorithm. The activity of lying and walking
was detected with an accuracy of 100% under control conditions.
This is an improvement in walking detection over the method used
by Najafi et el. where spurious peak detection may have resulted
in misclassification (Fig. 4(a)). Importantly, the activities of walk-
ing and step counting were more clearly identifiable using VESPA,
with the elimination of spurious peaks (Table 1 and Fig. 4) when
compared to the method adopted by Najafi et al. [17]. This new
kinematic sensor and simplified activity algorithm technique was
then applied to data recorded from an elderly group in their own
home environment. The same activities as performed by the EHS
were also identified successfully with a sensitivity and specificity
of 89% and 83%, while SiSt had a sensitivity and specificity of 83%
 A. Godfrey et al. / Medical Engineering & Physics 33 (2011) 1127–1135
and 89% respectively. Posture duration transition times were also
similar between the two systems for both age groups examined.
Limitations of the current study include a 1-s calibration before
the performance of each activity. This required the participants
to remain still for at least 1-s to provide the quantities required
by the calibration technique [4]. There is also a lack of continu-
ous, long-term ADL for both groups and accurate recordings for
at home testing. Future work based upon the techniques devel-
oped and presented here will involve the recruitment of a larger
cohort within these groups, over an extended recording period
(7–14 days) to test the algorithm under continuous ambulatory
monitoring.
The proposed low-power (<1.2 mA) sensor (single tri-axial
accelerometer) and new activity algorithm (VESPA) while still at
an early stage of development has a number of advantages over
previous methods:
(a) Simple and easy to use activity algorithm and as a result the
new VESPA algorithm is less processor intensive.
(b) Use of a low-power body worn sensor (single tri-axial
accelerometer on the chest) to improve long term ambulatory
monitoring.
CAALYX (Complete Ambient Assisted Living Experiment) is an
Integrated Project supported by the European Community under
the Sixth Framework Programme (IST-2006-045215).
Conflict of interest
The authors wish to acknowledge the assistance of the
volunteers, Analog Devices, BV for providing the ADXL210
accelerometers and ADXRS300 gyroscopes and the CAALYX FP6
project caalyx.eu [26], for their financial support.
References
[1] Coleman KJ, Saelens BE, Wiedrich-Smith MD, Finn JD, Epstein LH. Relationships
between TriTrac-R3D vectors, heart rate, and self-report in obese children. Med
Sci Sports Exerc 1997;29(11):1535–42.
[2] Clarke-Moloney M, Godfrey A, O’Connor V, Meagher H, Burke PE, Kavanagh EG,
et al. Mobility in patients with venous leg ulceration. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg
2007;33(4):488–93.
[3] Bourke AK, O’Brien JV, Lyons GM. Evaluation of a threshold-based tri-axial
accelerometer fall detection algorithm. Gait Posture 2007;26(2):194–9.
[4] Bourke AK, O’Donovan KJ, Ólaighin GM. The identification of vertical velocity
profiles using an inertial sensor to investigate pre-impact detection of falls.
Med Eng Phys 2008;30(7):937–46.
[5] Moore ST, MacDougall HG, Gracies JM, Cohen HS, Ondo WG. Long-term moni-
toring of gait in Parkinson’s disease. Gait Posture 2007;26(2):200–7.
1135
[6] Culhane KM, Lyons GM, Hilton D, Grace PA, Lyons D. Long-term mobility mon-
itoring of older adults using accelerometers in a clinical environment. Clin
Rehabil 2004;18(3):335–43.
[7] Grant M, Dall P, Granat M. The feasibility of measuring activity patterns of
women with osteoporosis. In: Procedings of the 4th world congress of the
international society of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 2007.
[8] Ryan C, Gray H, Newton M, Granat MH. An investigation of the effects of psy-
chological distress on physical activity levels in individuals with chronic lower
back pain. In: Procedings of the 4th world congress of the international society
of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 2007.
[9] Leonard M, Godfrey A, Silberhorn M, Conroy M, Donnelly S, Meagher D, et al.
Motion analysis in delirium: a novel method of clarifying motoric subtypes.
Neurocase 2007;13(4):272–7.
[10] Culhane KM, O’Connor M, Lyons D, Lyons GM. Accelerometers in rehabilitation
medicine for older adults. Age Ageing 2005;34(6):556–60.
[11] Coley B, Najafi B, Paraschiv-Ionescu A, Aminian K. Stair climbing detec-
tion during daily physical activity using a miniature gyroscope. Gait Posture
2005;22(4):287–94.
[12] Nyan MN, Tay FE, Tan AW, Seah KH. Distinguishing fall activities from normal
activities by angular rate characteristics and high-speed camera characteriza-
tion. Med Eng Phys 2006;28(8):842–9.
[13] Kangas M, Konttila A, Lindgren P, Winblad I, Jamsa T. Comparison of low-
complexity fall detection algorithms for body attached accelerometers. Gait
Posture 2008;28(2):285–91.
[14] Karantonis DM, Narayanan MR, Mathie M, Lovell NH, Celler BG. Implementation
of a real-time human movement classifier using a triaxial accelerometer for
ambulatory monitoring. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 2006;10(1):156–67.
[15] Lyons GM, Culhane KM, Hilton D, Grace PA, Lyons D. A description of
an accelerometer-based mobility monitoring technique. Med Eng Phys
2005;27(6):497–504.
[16] Godfrey A, Conway R, Meagher D, Ólaighin GM. Direct measurement of human
movement by accelerometry. Med Eng Phys 2008;30(10):1364–86.
[17] Najafi B, Aminian K, Paraschiv-Ionescu A, Loew F, Bula CJ, Robert P.
Ambulatory system for human motion analysis using a kinematic sensor:
monitoring of daily physical activity in the elderly. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng
2003;50(6):711–23.
[18] Ferraris F, Grimaldi U, Parvis M. Procedure for effortless in-field calibra-
tion of three-axis rate gyros and accelerometers. Sens Mater 1995;7(5):
311–30.
[19] Lötters J, Schipper J, Veltink PH, Olthuis W, Bergveld P. Procedure for in-use
calibration of triaxial accelerometers in medical applications. Sens Actuators
A: Phys 1998;68:221–8.
[20] Semmlow J. Biosignal and biomedical image processing: matlab based appli-
cations. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2004.
[21] Bruce A, Donoho D, Gao H-Y. Wavelet analysis. IEEE Spectr 1996;33(10):26–35.
[22] Degen T, Jaeckel H, Rufer M, Wyss S. SPEEDY: a fall detector in a wrist watch. In:
Proceedings of the seventh IEEE international symposium on wearable com-
puters, 2003. 2003.
[23] Bourke AK, O’Donovan KJ, Nelson J, Ólaighin GM. Fall-detection through vertical
velocity thresholding using a tri-axial accelerometer characterized using an
optical motion-capture system. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008:2832–5.
[24] Daubechies I. Ten lectures on wavelets (CBMS-NSF regional conference series in
applied mathematics). Philadelphia, PA, USA: Society for Industrial and Applied
Mathematics; 1992.
[25] Najafi B, Aminian K, Loew F, Blanc Y, Robert PA. Measurement of stand-sit and
sit-stand transitions using a miniature gyroscope and its application in fall risk
evaluation in the elderly. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2002;49(8):843–51.
[26] Boulos MNK, Rocha A, Martins A, Vicente ME, Bolz A, Feld R, et al. CAALYX:
a new generation of location-based services in healthcare. Int J Health Geogr
2007;6(9):1–6.