Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.

<h4>Background</h4>The ActiGraph and activPAL monitors are the most frequently used thigh-worn devices to measure motion and posture, but the criterion validity to measure sitting, standing and postural transfer in the office setting is not known. Research question: To examine the criter...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Thomas Radtke, Manuel Rodriguez, Julia Braun, Holger Dressel
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/400a11a36a34452294e9fa637fd8cd80
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:400a11a36a34452294e9fa637fd8cd80
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:400a11a36a34452294e9fa637fd8cd802021-12-02T20:11:08ZCriterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0252659https://doaj.org/article/400a11a36a34452294e9fa637fd8cd802021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252659https://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>The ActiGraph and activPAL monitors are the most frequently used thigh-worn devices to measure motion and posture, but the criterion validity to measure sitting, standing and postural transfer in the office setting is not known. Research question: To examine the criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL activity monitors in repeatedly measuring a variety of different postures and motion in the office setting.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty office workers from the University of Zurich wore an ActiGraph and activPAL during two identical laboratory experiments lasting approximately 60 minutes each, within a maximum of 7 days. The experimental setting consisted of a standard computer office workstation with an electrically powered height-adjustable desk, a swivel chair without arm rests, a standard chair, a footrest, and a bookcase. The protocol consisted of 24 pre-defined tasks mimicking sitting, standing, stepping, and postural transitions around the workplace. All tasks were supervised and observed by the same experimenter.<h4>Results</h4>In repeated measurements (40 individual experiments), the percentages of correctly classified tasks for the ActiGraph and activPAL were, respectively, 100% vs. 85% for sitting, 87% vs. 100% for standing, and 100% vs. 73% for postural transitions. Both monitors correctly identified all stepping tasks. The activPAL misclassified sitting with legs outstretched, and sitting with both feet placed beneath the chair, as standing ~25-70% and 45% of the time, respectively. The ActiGraph misclassified standing with the right foot on a footrest as sitting in 65% of events.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The ActiGraph appears to be slightly more sensitive than the activPAL with respect to the measurement of sitting and postural transitions of short duration, whereas the activPAL seems to be slightly more accurate in capturing standing postures. This knowledge will help guide researchers to choose the best suitable monitor for their research setting.Thomas RadtkeManuel RodriguezJulia BraunHolger DresselPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 16, Iss 6, p e0252659 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Thomas Radtke Manuel Rodriguez Julia Braun Holger Dressel Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
description	<h4>Background</h4>The ActiGraph and activPAL monitors are the most frequently used thigh-worn devices to measure motion and posture, but the criterion validity to measure sitting, standing and postural transfer in the office setting is not known. Research question: To examine the criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL activity monitors in repeatedly measuring a variety of different postures and motion in the office setting.<h4>Methods</h4>Twenty office workers from the University of Zurich wore an ActiGraph and activPAL during two identical laboratory experiments lasting approximately 60 minutes each, within a maximum of 7 days. The experimental setting consisted of a standard computer office workstation with an electrically powered height-adjustable desk, a swivel chair without arm rests, a standard chair, a footrest, and a bookcase. The protocol consisted of 24 pre-defined tasks mimicking sitting, standing, stepping, and postural transitions around the workplace. All tasks were supervised and observed by the same experimenter.<h4>Results</h4>In repeated measurements (40 individual experiments), the percentages of correctly classified tasks for the ActiGraph and activPAL were, respectively, 100% vs. 85% for sitting, 87% vs. 100% for standing, and 100% vs. 73% for postural transitions. Both monitors correctly identified all stepping tasks. The activPAL misclassified sitting with legs outstretched, and sitting with both feet placed beneath the chair, as standing ~25-70% and 45% of the time, respectively. The ActiGraph misclassified standing with the right foot on a footrest as sitting in 65% of events.<h4>Conclusions</h4>The ActiGraph appears to be slightly more sensitive than the activPAL with respect to the measurement of sitting and postural transitions of short duration, whereas the activPAL seems to be slightly more accurate in capturing standing postures. This knowledge will help guide researchers to choose the best suitable monitor for their research setting.
format	article
author	Thomas Radtke Manuel Rodriguez Julia Braun Holger Dressel
author_facet	Thomas Radtke Manuel Rodriguez Julia Braun Holger Dressel
author_sort	Thomas Radtke
title	Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
title_short	Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
title_full	Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
title_fullStr	Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
title_full_unstemmed	Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.
title_sort	criterion validity of the actigraph and activpal in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: a cross-sectional laboratory study.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/400a11a36a34452294e9fa637fd8cd80
work_keys_str_mv	AT thomasradtke criterionvalidityoftheactigraphandactivpalinclassifyingpostureandmotioninofficebasedworkersacrosssectionallaboratorystudy AT manuelrodriguez criterionvalidityoftheactigraphandactivpalinclassifyingpostureandmotioninofficebasedworkersacrosssectionallaboratorystudy AT juliabraun criterionvalidityoftheactigraphandactivpalinclassifyingpostureandmotioninofficebasedworkersacrosssectionallaboratorystudy AT holgerdressel criterionvalidityoftheactigraphandactivpalinclassifyingpostureandmotioninofficebasedworkersacrosssectionallaboratorystudy
_version_	1718374940213772288

Criterion validity of the ActiGraph and activPAL in classifying posture and motion in office-based workers: A cross-sectional laboratory study.

Ejemplares similares