Martin Luther King Jr. Day
Our office will be closed Monday, Jan 18th in observance of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. We will reopen at regular business hours on Tuesday, Jan 19th.
Ability of Thigh-Worn Actigraph and activPAL Monitors to Classify Posture and Motion
- Published on Sept. 8, 2014
Purpose: This study compared sitting, standing, and stepping classifications from thigh-worn Actigraph and activPAL monitors under laboratory and free-living conditions.
Methods: Adults wore both monitors on the right thigh while performing six sitting, two standing, nine stepping, one cycling activity, and writing on a whiteboard with intermittent stepping under laboratory observation(n=21), and also during three days in free-living conditions(n=18). Percent time correctly classified was calculated for laboratory conditions. Between-monitor agreement and weighted kappa were calculated for free-living conditions.
Results: In the laboratory, both monitors correctly classified 100% of time standing and >95% of time in four of six sitting postures. Both monitors demonstrated misclassification of laboratory stool sitting time (Actigraph 14%, activPAL 95%).The activPAL misclassified 14% of the time spent sitting with legs outstretched; the Actigraph was 100% accurate. Monitors were >95% accurate for stepping, although the Actigraph was less so for descending stairs (86%), ascending stairs (92%) and running at 2.91 m/s (93%). Monitors classified whiteboard writing differently (Actigraph 83% standing/15% stepping, activPAL 98% standing /2% stepping). ActivPAL classified 93% of cycling time as stepping, while Actigraph classified <1% of it as stepping. During free-living wear, monitors had substantial agreement (86% observed, weighted kappa=0.77). Monitors classified similar amounts of time as sitting (Actigraph 64%, activPAL 62%). There were differences in time recorded as standing (Actigraph 21%, activPAL 27%), and stepping (Actigraph 15%, activPAL 11%).
Conclusions: Differences in data processing algorithms may have resulted in observed disagreement in posture and activity classification between thigh-worn Actigraph and activPAL in specific activity and/or posture types. Despite between monitor agreement in classifying sitting time under free-living conditions, the Actigraph appears more sensitive to free-living upright walking motions than the activPAL.