Ann M Swartz1, Aubrianne E Rote2, Young Ik Cho3, Whitney A Welch4, Scott J Strath1. 1. Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA Center on Aging and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. 2. Department of Health and Wellness, University of North Carolina-Asheville, Asheville, North Carolina, USA. 3. Center on Aging and Translational Research, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA Zilber School of Public Health, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA. 4. Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness of two motion sensors to detect change in sedentary behaviour (SB) and physical activity (PA) during an occupational intervention to reduce sitting time. METHODS: SB and PA were assessed using a hip-worn Actigraph GTX3 (AG) and a thigh-worn activPAL (AP) during three consecutive workdays throughout baseline and intervention periods. Mean scores at baseline and intervention were estimated by hierarchical linear models (HLM) with robust SEs, adjusting for random variance of average scores between participants. Change scores (mean baseline minus mean intervention) were calculated for each device. Response to change was assessed for each device using the standardised response mean. RESULTS: 67 adults (45 ± 11 years; 29.3 ± 7.7 kg/m(2)) wore the acceleration-based motion sensors for 8.3 (SD=1.2) and 8.3 (SD=1.1) h during the baseline and intervention periods, respectively. HLM showed that AP sitting/lying time (-16.5 min, -5%), AP stepping (+7.5 min, 19%), AP steps/day (+838 steps/day, +22%), AP sit-to-stand transitions (+3, +10%), AG SB (-14.6 min, -4%), AG lifestyle moderate-intensity PA (LMPA, +4 min, +15%) and AG MPA (+3 min, 23%) changed significantly between the baseline and the intervention period. Standardised response means for AP sitting/lying time, stepping, steps/day, sit-to-stand transitions and AG SB, LMPA and MPA were above 0.3, indicating a small but similar responsiveness to change. CONCLUSIONS: Responsiveness to change in SB and PA was similar and comparable for the AP and AG, indicating agreement across both measurement devices. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine the responsiveness of two motion sensors to detect change in sedentary behaviour (SB) and physical activity (PA) during an occupational intervention to reduce sitting time. METHODS:SB and PA were assessed using a hip-worn Actigraph GTX3 (AG) and a thigh-worn activPAL (AP) during three consecutive workdays throughout baseline and intervention periods. Mean scores at baseline and intervention were estimated by hierarchical linear models (HLM) with robust SEs, adjusting for random variance of average scores between participants. Change scores (mean baseline minus mean intervention) were calculated for each device. Response to change was assessed for each device using the standardised response mean. RESULTS: 67 adults (45 ± 11 years; 29.3 ± 7.7 kg/m(2)) wore the acceleration-based motion sensors for 8.3 (SD=1.2) and 8.3 (SD=1.1) h during the baseline and intervention periods, respectively. HLM showed that AP sitting/lying time (-16.5 min, -5%), AP stepping (+7.5 min, 19%), AP steps/day (+838 steps/day, +22%), AP sit-to-stand transitions (+3, +10%), AG SB (-14.6 min, -4%), AG lifestyle moderate-intensity PA (LMPA, +4 min, +15%) and AG MPA (+3 min, 23%) changed significantly between the baseline and the intervention period. Standardised response means for AP sitting/lying time, stepping, steps/day, sit-to-stand transitions and AG SB, LMPA and MPA were above 0.3, indicating a small but similar responsiveness to change. CONCLUSIONS: Responsiveness to change in SB and PA was similar and comparable for the AP and AG, indicating agreement across both measurement devices. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Entities:
Keywords:
Physical activity and exercise methodology; Physical activity measurement
Authors: Charles E Matthews; Kong Y Chen; Patty S Freedson; Maciej S Buchowski; Bettina M Beech; Russell R Pate; Richard P Troiano Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2008-02-25 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: D W Dunstan; J Salmon; N Owen; T Armstrong; P Z Zimmet; T A Welborn; A J Cameron; T Dwyer; D Jolley; J E Shaw Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2005-10-07 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Genevieve N Healy; Katrien Wijndaele; David W Dunstan; Jonathan E Shaw; Jo Salmon; Paul Z Zimmet; Neville Owen Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2007-11-13 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Richard P Troiano; David Berrigan; Kevin W Dodd; Louise C Mâsse; Timothy Tilert; Margaret McDowell Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Josephine Y Chau; Michelle Daley; Scott Dunn; Anu Srinivasan; Anna Do; Adrian E Bauman; Hidde P van der Ploeg Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Femke van Nassau; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Frank Abrahamsen; Eivind Andersen; Annie S Anderson; Judith E Bosmans; Christopher Bunn; Matthew Chalmers; Ciaran Clissmann; Jason M R Gill; Cindy M Gray; Kate Hunt; Judith G M Jelsma; Jennifer G La Guardia; Pierre N Lemyre; David W Loudon; Lisa Macaulay; Douglas J Maxwell; Alex McConnachie; Anne Martin; Nikos Mourselas; Nanette Mutrie; Ria Nijhuis-van der Sanden; Kylie O'Brien; Hugo V Pereira; Matthew Philpott; Glyn C Roberts; John Rooksby; Mattias Rost; Øystein Røynesdal; Naveed Sattar; Marlene N Silva; Marit Sorensen; Pedro J Teixeira; Shaun Treweek; Theo van Achterberg; Irene van de Glind; Willem van Mechelen; Sally Wyke Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-07-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Sally Wyke; Christopher Bunn; Eivind Andersen; Marlene N Silva; Femke van Nassau; Paula McSkimming; Spyros Kolovos; Jason M R Gill; Cindy M Gray; Kate Hunt; Annie S Anderson; Judith Bosmans; Judith G M Jelsma; Sharon Kean; Nicolas Lemyre; David W Loudon; Lisa Macaulay; Douglas J Maxwell; Alex McConnachie; Nanette Mutrie; Maria Nijhuis-van der Sanden; Hugo V Pereira; Matthew Philpott; Glyn C Roberts; John Rooksby; Øystein B Røynesdal; Naveed Sattar; Marit Sørensen; Pedro J Teixeira; Shaun Treweek; Theo van Achterberg; Irene van de Glind; Willem van Mechelen; Hidde P van der Ploeg Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2019-02-05 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Gustavo J Almeida; Lauren Terhorst; James J Irrgang; G Kelley Fitzgerald; John M Jakicic; Sara R Piva Journal: J Exerc Sports Orthop Date: 2017-12-06
Authors: Femke van Nassau; Josephine Y Chau; Jeroen Lakerveld; Adrian E Bauman; Hidde P van der Ploeg Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2015-11-25 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Charlotte L Edwardson; Elisabeth A H Winkler; Danielle H Bodicoat; Tom Yates; Melanie J Davies; David W Dunstan; Genevieve N Healy Journal: J Sport Health Sci Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 7.179