Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.

<h4>Aims</h4>The study aims were to evaluate the validity of two commercially available swimming activity monitors for quantifying temporal and kinematic swimming variables.<h4>Methods</h4>Ten national level swimmers (5 male, 5 female; 15.3±1.3years; 164.8±12.9cm; 62.4±11.1kg...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Robert Mooney, Leo R Quinlan, Gavin Corley, Alan Godfrey, Conor Osborough, Gearóid ÓLaighin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2017-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170902&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849766489563856896
author Robert Mooney
Leo R Quinlan
Gavin Corley
Alan Godfrey
Conor Osborough
Gearóid ÓLaighin
author_facet Robert Mooney
Leo R Quinlan
Gavin Corley
Alan Godfrey
Conor Osborough
Gearóid ÓLaighin
author_sort Robert Mooney
collection DOAJ
description <h4>Aims</h4>The study aims were to evaluate the validity of two commercially available swimming activity monitors for quantifying temporal and kinematic swimming variables.<h4>Methods</h4>Ten national level swimmers (5 male, 5 female; 15.3±1.3years; 164.8±12.9cm; 62.4±11.1kg; 425±66 FINA points) completed a set protocol comprising 1,500m of swimming involving all four competitive swimming strokes. Swimmers wore the Finis Swimsense and the Garmin Swim activity monitors throughout. The devices automatically identified stroke type, swim distance, lap time, stroke count, stroke rate, stroke length and average speed. Video recordings were also obtained and used as a criterion measure to evaluate performance.<h4>Results</h4>A significant positive correlation was found between the monitors and video for the identification of each of the four swim strokes (Garmin: X2 (3) = 31.292, p<0.05; Finis:X2 (3) = 33.004, p<0.05). No significant differences were found for swim distance measurements. Swimming laps performed in the middle of a swimming interval showed no significant difference from the criterion (Garmin: bias -0.065, 95% confidence intervals -3.828-6.920; Finis bias -0.02, 95% confidence intervals -3.095-3.142). However laps performed at the beginning and end of an interval were not as accurately timed. Additionally, a statistical difference was found for stroke count measurements in all but two occasions (p<0.05). These differences affect the accuracy of stroke rate, stroke length and average speed scores reported by the monitors, as all of these are derived from lap times and stroke counts.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Both monitors were found to operate with a relatively similar performance level and appear suited for recreational use. However, issues with feature detection accuracy may be related to individual variances in stroke technique. It is reasonable to expect that this level of error would increase when the devices are used by recreational swimmers rather than elite swimmers. Further development to improve accuracy of feature detection algorithms, specifically for lap time and stroke count, would also increase their suitability within competitive settings.
format Article
id doaj-art-ce1579d2d65a44db9a251610fe71ad00
institution DOAJ
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2017-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-ce1579d2d65a44db9a251610fe71ad002025-08-20T03:04:34ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032017-01-01122e017090210.1371/journal.pone.0170902Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.Robert MooneyLeo R QuinlanGavin CorleyAlan GodfreyConor OsboroughGearóid ÓLaighin<h4>Aims</h4>The study aims were to evaluate the validity of two commercially available swimming activity monitors for quantifying temporal and kinematic swimming variables.<h4>Methods</h4>Ten national level swimmers (5 male, 5 female; 15.3±1.3years; 164.8±12.9cm; 62.4±11.1kg; 425±66 FINA points) completed a set protocol comprising 1,500m of swimming involving all four competitive swimming strokes. Swimmers wore the Finis Swimsense and the Garmin Swim activity monitors throughout. The devices automatically identified stroke type, swim distance, lap time, stroke count, stroke rate, stroke length and average speed. Video recordings were also obtained and used as a criterion measure to evaluate performance.<h4>Results</h4>A significant positive correlation was found between the monitors and video for the identification of each of the four swim strokes (Garmin: X2 (3) = 31.292, p<0.05; Finis:X2 (3) = 33.004, p<0.05). No significant differences were found for swim distance measurements. Swimming laps performed in the middle of a swimming interval showed no significant difference from the criterion (Garmin: bias -0.065, 95% confidence intervals -3.828-6.920; Finis bias -0.02, 95% confidence intervals -3.095-3.142). However laps performed at the beginning and end of an interval were not as accurately timed. Additionally, a statistical difference was found for stroke count measurements in all but two occasions (p<0.05). These differences affect the accuracy of stroke rate, stroke length and average speed scores reported by the monitors, as all of these are derived from lap times and stroke counts.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Both monitors were found to operate with a relatively similar performance level and appear suited for recreational use. However, issues with feature detection accuracy may be related to individual variances in stroke technique. It is reasonable to expect that this level of error would increase when the devices are used by recreational swimmers rather than elite swimmers. Further development to improve accuracy of feature detection algorithms, specifically for lap time and stroke count, would also increase their suitability within competitive settings.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170902&type=printable
spellingShingle Robert Mooney
Leo R Quinlan
Gavin Corley
Alan Godfrey
Conor Osborough
Gearóid ÓLaighin
Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
PLoS ONE
title Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
title_full Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
title_fullStr Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
title_short Evaluation of the Finis Swimsense® and the Garmin Swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis.
title_sort evaluation of the finis swimsense r and the garmin swim™ activity monitors for swimming performance and stroke kinematics analysis
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170902&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT robertmooney evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis
AT leorquinlan evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis
AT gavincorley evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis
AT alangodfrey evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis
AT conorosborough evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis
AT gearoidolaighin evaluationofthefinisswimsenseandthegarminswimactivitymonitorsforswimmingperformanceandstrokekinematicsanalysis