Comparative Analysis Between ActiGraph And ActivPAL Measured Moderate To Vigorous Physical Activity For People With COPD

Le résumé fourni par la source

ActiGraph (AG) accelerometers are commonly used to measure sedentary behavior (SB) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), but there are compliance issues with waist-worn devices that lead to problems with missing data. ActivPAL (AP) devices are worn 24 hours/day on the thigh, and there is minimal missing data, but PAL software does not estimate MVPA. PURPOSE: We estimated MVPA from AP data using 5 data processing methods and assessed their agreement with AG-measured MVPA among older adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to determine whether AP devices can be used to measure MVPA. METHODS: This is a secondary data analysis of data collected from 148 inactive adults (aged ≥50) with COPD. Participants wore ActivPAL3 on the thigh and ActiGraph GT9X on the waist concurrently for 7 days. ActivPAL data was processed using the following methods: 1) metabolic equivalents (METs), 2) ≥75 steps/min, 3) ≥100 steps/min, 4) vector magnitude (VM) acceleration counts, and 5) vertical axis counts. ActiGraph data was processed using Freedson (2011) and Evenson (2023) VM cut points, 60s epochs, and normal filters. The Bland-Altman plots and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were used to assess the agreement between AP and AG MVPA using individual day-level data. RESULTS: Compared to AG MVPA using Freedson VM cut points, CCC ranged from 0.62 to 0.64 for all AP MVPA, except for 100 steps/min (CCC = 0.44). Compared to AG MVPA using Evenson VM cut points, CCC ranged from 0.08 to 0.18 for all AP MVPA. CONCLUSION: Most AP-derived estimates of MVPA showed moderate agreement and low bias and were reasonably accurate when compared to AG-derived MVPA with Freedson VM cut points. Further research is needed to further validate this approach. Table 1. - Comparing AG and AP Data Processing Methods for Measruing MVPA in Older Adults with COPD (n = 148) ActiGraph (60 second epochs, Normal Filter) Freedson VM cut points Evenson VM cut points ActivPAL Data Reduction Techniques Mean difference AG-AP (95%CI) Concordance Correlation(95%CI) Mean difference AG-AP (95%CI) Concordance Correlation(95%CI) METs (≥3 METs) 3.65 (-22.41, 29.72) 0.63 (0.58, 0.66) 33.50 (-32.27, 99.28) 0.18 (0.16, 0.21) Steps (≥75 steps/min) 3.93 (-22.16, 30.02) 0.62 (0.57, 0.66) 33.78 (-32.35, 99.90) 0.18 (0.15, 0.20) Steps (≥100 steps/min) 8.23 (-18.20, 34.66) 0.44 (0.40, 0.48) 38.08 (-32.14, 108.29) 0.08 (0.06, 0.09) VM acceleration counts (≥35492) 5.28 (-20.00, 30.56) 0.62 (0.57, 0.65) 35.13 (-31.54, 101.80) 0.16 (0.14, 0.19) Vertical axis counts (≥20492) 5.55 (-18.82, 29.91) 0.64 (0.60, 0.67) 35.39 (-31.43, 102.22) 0.16 (0.13, 0.18) Note. VM = Vector Magnitude; AG = ActiGraph; AP = ActivPAL; METs = Metabolic Equivalents Supported by: J.Y.S. is supported by NIH T32 NR016914.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.