W Jack Rejeski1, Michael P Walkup2, Roger A Fielding3, Abby C King4, Todd Manini5, Anthony P Marsh1, Mary McDermott6, Emily Y Miller2, Anne B Newman7, Catrine Tudor-Locke8, Robert S Axtell9, Michael E Miller2. 1. Department of Health and Exercise Science, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 2. Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 3. Nutrition, Exercise Physiology and Sarcopenia Laboratory, Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Health Research and Policy and Stanford Prevention Research, Palo Alto, California. 5. Department of Aging and Geriatric Research, University of Florida, Gainesville. 6. General Internal Medicine and Geriatrics and Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois. 7. Department of Epidemiology and Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 8. Department of Kinesiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst. 9. Exercise Science Department, Southern Connecticut State University, New Haven.
Abstract
Background: An important decision with accelerometry is the threshold in counts per minute (CPM) used to define moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). We explore the ability of different thresholds to track changes in MVPA due to a physical activity (PA) intervention among older adults with compromised function: 760 CPM, 1,041 CPM, and an individualized threshold. We also evaluate the ability of change in accelerometry and self-reported PA to attenuate treatment effects on major mobility disability (MMD). Methods: Data from a week of hip worn accelerometers and self-reported PA data (30-day recall) were examined from baseline, 6-, 12-, and 24-months of follow-up on 1,528 older adults. Participants were randomized to either PA or Health Education (HE). MMD was objectively defined by loss of ability to walk 400 m during the follow-up. Results: The three thresholds yielded similar and higher levels of MVPA for PA than HE (p < .001), however, this difference was significantly attenuated in participants with lower levels of physical function. Self-reported PA that captured both walking and strength training totally attenuated the intervention effect for MMD, an 18% reduction to a 3% increase. Accelerometer CPMs showed less attenuation of the intervention effect. Conclusions: Accelerometry assessment within the LIFE study was not sensitive to change in level in physical activity for older adults with very low levels of physical function. A combination of self-report and objective measures are recommended for use in physical activity intervention studies of the elderly; limitations of accelerometry deserve closer attention.
RCT Entities:
Background: An important decision with accelerometry is the threshold in counts per minute (CPM) used to define moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). We explore the ability of different thresholds to track changes in MVPA due to a physical activity (PA) intervention among older adults with compromised function: 760 CPM, 1,041 CPM, and an individualized threshold. We also evaluate the ability of change in accelerometry and self-reported PA to attenuate treatment effects on major mobility disability (MMD). Methods: Data from a week of hip worn accelerometers and self-reported PA data (30-day recall) were examined from baseline, 6-, 12-, and 24-months of follow-up on 1,528 older adults. Participants were randomized to either PA or Health Education (HE). MMD was objectively defined by loss of ability to walk 400 m during the follow-up. Results: The three thresholds yielded similar and higher levels of MVPA for PA than HE (p < .001), however, this difference was significantly attenuated in participants with lower levels of physical function. Self-reported PA that captured both walking and strength training totally attenuated the intervention effect for MMD, an 18% reduction to a 3% increase. Accelerometer CPMs showed less attenuation of the intervention effect. Conclusions: Accelerometry assessment within the LIFE study was not sensitive to change in level in physical activity for older adults with very low levels of physical function. A combination of self-report and objective measures are recommended for use in physical activity intervention studies of the elderly; limitations of accelerometry deserve closer attention.
Authors: W Jack Rejeski; Anthony P Marsh; Peter H Brubaker; Matthew Buman; Roger A Fielding; Don Hire; Todd Manini; Alvito Rego; Michael E Miller Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Miriam E Nelson; W Jack Rejeski; Steven N Blair; Pamela W Duncan; James O Judge; Abby C King; Carol A Macera; Carmen Castaneda-Sceppa Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-08-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Anthony P Marsh; Laura C Lovato; Nancy W Glynn; Kimberly Kennedy; Cynthia Castro; Kathryn Domanchuk; Erica McDavitt; Ruben Rodate; Michael Marsiske; Joanne McGloin; Erik J Groessl; Marco Pahor; Jack M Guralnik Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 6.053
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: Cemal Ozemek; Heather L Cochran; Scott J Strath; Wonwoo Byun; Leonard A Kaminsky Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2013-04-01 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Jennifer A Schrack; Pei-Lun Kuo; Amal A Wanigatunga; Junrui Di; Eleanor M Simonsick; Adam P Spira; Luigi Ferrucci; Vadim Zipunnikov Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-03-14 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Jason Fanning; W Jack Rejeski; Iris Leng; Cheyenne Barnett; James F Lovato; Mary F Lyles; Barbara J Nicklas Journal: Obesity (Silver Spring) Date: 2022-01 Impact factor: 5.002
Authors: Erja Portegijs; Laura Karavirta; Milla Saajanaho; Timo Rantalainen; Taina Rantanen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2019-11-27 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ahmed Elhakeem; Kimberly Hannam; Kevin C Deere; April Hartley; Emma M Clark; Charlotte Moss; Mark H Edwards; Elaine Dennison; Tim Gaysin; Diana Kuh; Andrew Wong; Cyrus Cooper; Rachel Cooper; Jon H Tobias Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 6.053