Comparing the Actical and ActiGraph Approach to Measuring Young Children’s Physical Activity Levels and Sedentary Time

Abstract

Young children's activity and sedentary time were simultaneously measured via the Actical method (i.e., Actical accelerometer and specific cut-points) and the ActiGraph method (i.e., ActiGraph accelerometer and specific cut-points) at both 15-s and 60-s epochs to explore possible differences between these 2 measurement approaches. For 7 consecutive days, participants (n = 23) wore both the Actical and ActiGraph side-by-side on an elastic neoprene belt. Device-specific cut-points were applied. Paired sample t tests were conducted to determine the differences in participants' daily average activity levels and sedentary time (min/h) measured by the 2 devices at 15-s and 60-s time sampling intervals. Bland-Altman plots were used to examine agreement between Actical and ActiGraph accelerometers. Regardless of epoch length, Actical accelerometers reported significantly higher rates of sedentary time (15 s: 42.7 min/h vs 33.5 min/h; 60 s: 39.4 min/h vs 27.1 min/h). ActiGraph accelerometers captured significantly higher rates of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (15 s: 9.2 min/h vs 2.6 min/h; 60 s: 8.0 min/h vs 1.27 min/h) and total physical activity (15 s: 31.7 min/h vs 22.3 min/h; 60 s: = 39.4 min/h vs 25.2 min/h) in comparison with Actical accelerometers. These results highlight the present accelerometry-related issues with interpretation of datasets derived from different monitors.

Usefulness of continuous actigraph monitoring in the assessment of the effect of corticosteroid treatment for Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a case report

“…It has been reported that the amount of daily life activity for the motor-functional evaluation of healthy children and pediatric diseases3,4,5,6 ) can be monitored using an actigraph. Furthermore, the amount of activity recorded by an actigraph has been used as the main outcome index to reflect the amount of physical activity in the home environment of patients with DMD6 ) .…”

Examining accelerometer validity for estimating physical activity in pre‐schoolers during free‐living activity

“…As little movement of the arms or hips occurs during activities such as cycling on a tricycle, this activity is classified as MVPA according to the OSRAC‐P, but may be classified as LPA according to accelerometry. Similar issues have been highlighted by prior research when differentiating light PA from SB, and light PA from MVPA . Vale et al stated that this difficulty can be due to the type of activities that can be included in free play.…”

“…There is also a lack of clarity as to which accelerometer cut points provide the most accurate assessment of both PA and SB in free-living conditions. 9 Additionally, understanding which epoch length might be preferable to capture the sporadic and short burst nature of pre-schoolers PA would be beneficial in guiding researchers in the analysis of accelerometer data. 10 There is also debate which location may be optimal when assessing PA in pre-schoolers.…”

“…There is considerable variation in the values of cut points provided for the same placement (eg, hip vs wrist) and epoch lengths for pre‐schoolers. There is also a lack of clarity as to which accelerometer cut points provide the most accurate assessment of both PA and SB in free‐living conditions . Additionally, understanding which epoch length might be preferable to capture the sporadic and short burst nature of pre‐schoolers PA would be beneficial in guiding researchers in the analysis of accelerometer data .…”

Improved interpretation of studies comparing methods of dietary assessment: combining equivalence testing with the limits of agreement

“…The comparison of 3 ×24HR with a FFQ outlined here is an example of an approach that can be applied not only to dietary methodology but also to other methods used in nutrition practice and research, which are commonly assessed for agreement using BA methodology. These include comparing resting energy expenditure prediction equations to indirect calorimetry (39)(40)(41)(42) , bioelectrical impedance analysers to dual energy x-ray absorptiometry for assessing body composition (43)(44)(45)(46) and in validating physical activity assessment tools (47)(48)(49) . In summary, we have introduced an equivalence approach to be used in conjunction with the BA method in order to encourage clinicians to establish up front what constitutes a clinically meaningful difference between the two methods being considered.…”