Validity, Reliability and Sensitivity to Change of Three Consumer-Grade Activity Trackers in Controlled and Free-Living Conditions Among Older Adults

Overview

Journal Sensors (Basel)

Publisher MDPI

Specialty Biotechnology

Date 2021 Sep 28

PMID 34577457

Citations 3

Authors

Kaja Kastelic

Marina Dobnik

Stefan Lofler

Christian Hofer

Nejc Sarabon

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Wrist-worn consumer-grade activity trackers are popular devices, developed mainly for personal use. This study aimed to explore the validity, reliability and sensitivity to change of movement behaviors metrics from three activity trackers (Polar Vantage M, Garmin Vivoactive 4s and Garmin Vivosport) in controlled and free-living conditions when worn by older adults. Participants (n = 28; 74 ± 5 years) underwent a videotaped laboratory protocol while wearing all three trackers. On a separate occasion, participants (n = 17 for each of the trackers) wore one (randomly assigned) tracker and a research-grade activity monitor ActiGraph wGT3X-BT simultaneously for six consecutive days. Both Garmin trackers showed excellent performance for step counts, with a mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) below 20% and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) above 0.90 ( < 0.05). The MAPE for sleep time was within 10% for all the trackers tested, while it was far beyond 20% for all other movement behaviors metrics. The results suggested that all three trackers could be used for measuring sleep time with a high level of accuracy, and both Garmin trackers could also be used for step counts. All other output metrics should be used with caution. The results provided in this study could be used to guide choice on activity trackers aiming for different purposes-individual use, longitudinal monitoring or in clinical trial setting.

Citing Articles

Physical Activity in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Which Real-World Accelerometry Measures Are Robust? A Systematic Review.

Jabbar K, Mc Ardle R, Lord S, Kerse N, Del Din S, Teh R Sensors (Basel). 2023; 23(17).

PMID: 37688071 PMC: 10490754. DOI: 10.3390/s23177615.

Effects of Two Physical Activity Interventions on Sleep and Sedentary Time in Pregnant Women.

Alomairah S, Knudsen S, Roland C, Molsted S, Clausen T, Bendix J Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023; 20(7).

PMID: 37047973 PMC: 10094525. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20075359.

Use of activPAL to Measure Physical Activity in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Systematic Review.

Blackwood J, Suzuki R, Webster N, Karczewski H, Ziccardi T, Shah S Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. 2022; 4(2):100190.

PMID: 35756981 PMC: 9214326. DOI: 10.1016/j.arrct.2022.100190.

References

Boeselt T, Spielmanns M, Nell C, Storre J, Windisch W, Magerhans L . Validity and Usability of Physical Activity Monitoring in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). PLoS One. 2016; 11(6):e0157229. PMC: 4909270. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157229. View

Troiano R, Berrigan D, Dodd K, Masse L, Tilert T, McDowell M . Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007; 40(1):181-8. DOI: 10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3. View

Johnston W, Judice P, Molina Garcia P, Muhlen J, Skovgaard E, Stang J . Recommendations for determining the validity of consumer wearable and smartphone step count: expert statement and checklist of the INTERLIVE network. Br J Sports Med. 2020; 55(14):780-793. PMC: 8273687. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-103147. View

Trost S, Loprinzi P, Moore R, Pfeiffer K . Comparison of accelerometer cut points for predicting activity intensity in youth. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010; 43(7):1360-8. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e318206476e. View

Simpson L, Eng J, Klassen T, Lim S, Louie D, Parappilly B . Capturing step counts at slow walking speeds in older adults: comparison of ankle and waist placement of measuring device. J Rehabil Med. 2015; 47(9):830-5. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-1993. View

Schmitz A, Silder A, Heiderscheit B, Mahoney J, Thelen D . Differences in lower-extremity muscular activation during walking between healthy older and young adults. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2008; 19(6):1085-91. PMC: 3689417. DOI: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2008.10.008. View

Cooper C, Gross A, Brinkman C, Pope R, Allen K, Hastings S . The impact of wearable motion sensing technology on physical activity in older adults. Exp Gerontol. 2018; 112:9-19. PMC: 6436091. DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2018.08.002. View

Bull F, Al-Ansari S, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Buman M, Cardon G . World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24):1451-1462. PMC: 7719906. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955. View

Straiton N, AlHarbi M, Bauman A, Neubeck L, Gullick J, Bhindi R . The validity and reliability of consumer-grade activity trackers in older, community-dwelling adults: A systematic review. Maturitas. 2018; 112:85-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2018.03.016. View

10.

Doherty A, Jackson D, Hammerla N, Plotz T, Olivier P, Granat M . Large Scale Population Assessment of Physical Activity Using Wrist Worn Accelerometers: The UK Biobank Study. PLoS One. 2017; 12(2):e0169649. PMC: 5287488. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0169649. View

11.

Burton E, Hill K, Lautenschlager N, Thogersen-Ntoumani C, Lewin G, Boyle E . Reliability and validity of two fitness tracker devices in the laboratory and home environment for older community-dwelling people. BMC Geriatr. 2018; 18(1):103. PMC: 5934836. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-018-0793-4. View

12.

Tedesco S, Sica M, Ancillao A, Timmons S, Barton J, OFlynn B . Accuracy of consumer-level and research-grade activity trackers in ambulatory settings in older adults. PLoS One. 2019; 14(5):e0216891. PMC: 6529154. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216891. View

13.

Tedesco S, Sica M, Ancillao A, Timmons S, Barton J, OFlynn B . Validity Evaluation of the Fitbit Charge2 and the Garmin vivosmart HR+ in Free-Living Environments in an Older Adult Cohort. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2019; 7(6):e13084. PMC: 6607774. DOI: 10.2196/13084. View

14.

Phillips L, Petroski G, Markis N . A Comparison of Accelerometer Accuracy in Older Adults. Res Gerontol Nurs. 2015; 8(5):213-9. DOI: 10.3928/19404921-20150429-03. View

15.

Brage S, Brage N, Franks P, Ekelund U, Wareham N . Reliability and validity of the combined heart rate and movement sensor Actiheart. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005; 59(4):561-70. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602118. View

16.

Hart T, Swartz A, Cashin S, Strath S . How many days of monitoring predict physical activity and sedentary behaviour in older adults?. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011; 8:62. PMC: 3130631. DOI: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-62. View

17.

Lauritzen J, Munoz A, Sevillano J, Civit A . The usefulness of activity trackers in elderly with reduced mobility: a case study. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013; 192:759-62. View

18.

Dinesen B, Dittmann L, Gade J, Jorgensen C, Hollingdal M, Leth S . "Future Patient" Telerehabilitation for Patients With Heart Failure: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial. JMIR Res Protoc. 2019; 8(9):e14517. PMC: 6754679. DOI: 10.2196/14517. View

19.

Chinoy E, Cuellar J, Huwa K, Jameson J, Watson C, Bessman S . Performance of seven consumer sleep-tracking devices compared with polysomnography. Sleep. 2020; 44(5). PMC: 8120339. DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsaa291. View

20.

Saint-Maurice P, Troiano R, Matthews C, Kraus W . Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity and All-Cause Mortality: Do Bouts Matter?. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018; 7(6). PMC: 5907548. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.117.007678. View