Objectives: This systematic review evaluated the accuracy of triaxial and omnidirectional accelerometers for measuring physical activity and sedentary behavior in children. Design: Systematic review of the literature. Methods: We comprehensively searched several databases for studies published from January 1996 through June 2018 that reported diagnostic accuracy measures in children and adolescents (age 3-18 years) and compared accelerometers with energy expenditure using indirect calorimetry. Results: We included 11 studies that enrolled 570 participants. All studies used indirect calorimetry as the reference standard. Across the studies, median sensitivity ranged from 46% to 96% and median specificity ranged from 71% to 96%. Median area under the curve ranged from 69% to 98%. Conclusions: Accuracy measures were greatest when detecting sedentary behavior and lowest when detecting light physical activity. Accuracy was higher when the accelerometer was placed on the hip compared with the wrist. The current evidence suggests that triaxial and omnidirectional accelerometers are accurate in measuring sedentary behavior and physical activity levels in children.

The 5-2-1-0 intervention used in this study was feasible. There was no significant change in healthy habits, likely due to the small number of participants in the study. The intervention and control sites were in different classrooms and there could be factors such as teacher enthusiasm, socioeconomic factors, and individual traits affecting habits. Future studies could use pre- and post-intervention quizzes to assess healthy habits knowledge retention, involving the environments the child participates in outside of school, using research-grade pedometers or accelerometers for measuring activity data collection, and recruiting larger samples to ensure adequate statistical power.

No abstract

Objective: Much has been written about the patients’ perspective concerning weight management in health care. The purpose of this survey study was to assess perspectives of primary care providers (PCPs) and nurses toward patient weight management and identify possible areas of growth. Patients and Methods: We emailed a weight management–focused survey to 674 eligible participants (437 [64.8%] nurses and 237 [35.2%] PCPs) located in 5 outpatient primary care clinics. The survey focused on opportunities, practices, knowledge, confidence, attitudes, and beliefs. A total of 219 surveys were returned (137 [62.6%] from nurses and 82 [34.4%] from PCPs). Results: Among 219 responders, 85.8% were female and 93.6% were white non-Hispanic. In this study, PCPs and nurses believed obesity to be a major health problem. While PCPs felt more equipped than nurses to address weight management ( P < .001) and reported receiving more training than nurses (50.0% vs 17.6%, respectively), both felt the need for more training on obesity (73.8% and 79.4%, respectively). Although, PCPs also spent more patient contact time providing weight management services versus nurses ( P < .001), the opportunity/practices score was lower for PCPs than nurses (−0.35 ± 0.44 vs −0.17 ± 0.41, P < .001) with PCPs more likely to say they lacked the time to discuss weight and they worried it would cause a poor patient-PCP relationship. The knowledge/confidence score also differed significantly between the groups, with nurses feeling less equipped to deal with weight management issues than PCPs (−0.42 ± 0.43 vs −0.03 ± 0.55, P < .001). Neither group seemed very confident, with those in the PCP group only answering with an average score of neutral. Conclusion: By asking nurses and PCP general questions about experiences, attitudes, knowledge, and opinions concerning weight management in clinical care, this survey has identified areas for growth in obesity management. Both PCPs and nurses would benefit from additional educational training on weight management.

Despite widely published speculation regarding a potential potency advantage of short-wavelength (blue-appearing) light for Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) treatment, there have been few systematic studies. Those comparing short-wavelength to broad-wavelength (white) light under actual clinical conditions suggest equivalent effectiveness. This multicenter, parallel-group design trial was undertaken to compare the effects of light therapy on SAD using blue (~465nm) versus blue-free (595–612nm) LED lights. Fifty-six medication-free subjects aged 21–64 years who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for recurrent major depression with winter-type seasonal pattern were enrolled in this blinded study at 5 participating centers between January and March 2012. Thirty-five subjects met criteria for randomization to 30 minutes of either blue (~465nm) or blue-free (595–612nm) daily morning light therapy. Twenty-nine subjects completed the study; three subjects withdrew due to treatment-related adverse events, including migraines, and three withdrew for non-study-related reasons. The primary effectiveness variable was depression score (SIGH-ADS) after six weeks of daily light treatment. Secondary effectiveness variables included Quality of Life and suicidality ratings. Using an intent-to-treat analysis, mean depression scores were different at baseline for the blue group (29±5 vs. 26±5, p=0.05 blue vs. blue-free, respectively), and initial score was used as a covariate. Baseline scores were not significantly different between treatment groups among those who completed the study, and no significant differences in depression scores were observed after 6 weeks (mean ± s.d. scores at 6 weeks: 5.6±6.1 vs. 4.5±5.3, p=0.74, blue vs. blue-free, respectively). In addition, the proportion of subjects who met remission criteria, defined as a depression score ≤8, was not significantly different between the two groups (p=0.41); among the 29 subjects who completed the study, 76% of subjects experienced remission by the end of the trial, which coincided with the beginning of spring. Quality of Life and suicidality ratings were also significantly improved from pre- to post-treatment, with no significant difference between treatments. No subject experienced worsening or non-improved symptoms over the 6-week trial. The main finding of this study is that subjects treated with blue light did not improve more than subjects treated with blue-free light; both showed substantial improvement on multiple measures. Failure to find differences may have resulted from methodological constraints, including a small sample size. Recruitment began mid-winter during an unusually mild season, and the trial was terminated earlier than planned by the study sponsor due to a failure to detect difference. However, if confirmed in a larger randomized sample, these results suggest that blue wavelengths are not necessary for successful SAD treatment.