Comparison of three activity monitors for estimating sedentary time among children. Issue 1 (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stålesen, Jarle; Vik, Frøydis; Hansen, Bjørge; Berntsen, Sveinung
• Is Part Of: BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation. Volume 8:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 6
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: Accelerometer -- ActiGraph -- ActivPAL -- Inclinometer -- Indirect calorimetry -- SenseWear; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Sports injuries -- Patients -- Rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Sports Medicine -- Periodicals; Athletic Injuries -- rehabilitation -- Periodicals; 617.102705
• DOI: 10.1186/s13102-016-0028-y
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2052-1847

Abstract

Abstract Background Time spent sedentary appears to be associated with several health outcomes in adults, but findings are inconsistent in children. Further, the assessment of sedentary time represents a major challenge. The objectives of the present study were to determine whether 1) ActiGraph GT3X+, ActivPAL and SenseWear Armband Pro3 (SWA) provide comparable estimates of sedentary time in 9–12-year-old children, 2) these devices are valid compared with direct observation, and 3) ActivPAL discriminates between sitting and standing behavior. Methods The sample was 67 children. Data were collected during three consecutive days in November 2012. To test the activity monitors in contexts related to physical and sedentary activities commonly performed by children, the children participated in sessions of activity while sitting (watching television, playing video games and tossing a ball while sitting) and standing (musical chairs, active video gaming and tossing a ball) while wearing three different activity monitors at the same time. All activity sessions were observed by two researchers. Differences between monitors were determined using Friedman's two-way analysis of variance by rank order. Results Minutes of estimated sedentary time differed across device brands during combined sitting activities: SWA vs. ActiGraph GT3X+ (P = 0.048), SWA vs. ActivPAL, (P < 0.001) and ActiGraph GT3X+ vs. ActivPAL (P = 0.002). Out of 12 min in total of combined recorded sitting activity, SWA reported a median of 6 min (95 % Confidence Interval [CI] = 5.0, 7.0), ActiGraph GT3X+ 7 min (7.0, 8.0) and ActivPAL 10 min (8.6, 10.8) as sedentary time. ActivPAL recorded 3.7 (2.4, 4.0) minutes of the non-sitting activities 'musical chairs', 4.0 (4.0, 4.0) minutes in 'standing ball toss'; and 4.0 (2.7, 4.0) minutes in 'active video gaming' as sitting time. Conclusion Recorded sedentary time varied among the monitors GT3X+, SWA and ActivPAL, and misclassification of standing activities as sitting activities were apparent for ActivPAL in certain activities.