Intra-individual variability in day-to-day and month-to-month measurements of physical activity and sedentary behaviour at work and in leisure-time among Danish adults

E S L Pedersen, I H Danquah, C B Petersen, J S Tolstrup, E S L Pedersen, I H Danquah, C B Petersen, J S Tolstrup

Abstract

Background: Accelerometers can obtain precise measurements of movements during the day. However, the individual activity pattern varies from day-to-day and there is limited evidence on measurement days needed to obtain sufficient reliability. The aim of this study was to examine variability in accelerometer derived data on sedentary behaviour and physical activity at work and in leisure-time during week days among Danish office employees.

Methods: We included control participants (n = 135) from the Take a Stand! Intervention; a cluster randomized controlled trial conducted in 19 offices. Sitting time and physical activity were measured using an ActiGraph GT3X+ fixed on the thigh and data were processed using Acti4 software. Variability was examined for sitting time, standing time, steps and time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day by multilevel mixed linear regression modelling.

Results: Results of this study showed that the number of days needed to obtain a reliability of 80% when measuring sitting time was 4.7 days for work and 5.5 days for leisure time. For physical activity at work, 4.0 days and 4.2 days were required to measure steps and MVPA, respectively. During leisure time, more monitoring time was needed to reliably estimate physical activity (6.8 days for steps and 5.8 days for MVPA).

Conclusions: The number of measurement days needed to reliably estimate activity patterns was greater for leisure time than for work time. The domain specific variability is of great importance to researchers and health promotion workers planning to use objective measures of sedentary behaviour and physical activity.

Trial registration: Clinical trials NCT01996176 .

Keywords: Accelerometer; Physical activity; Reliability; Sedentary behaviour; Variability.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Mean minutes spent sitting, standing and in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per day and mean steps at work and during leisure per day at the three measurement months

References

    1. Bauman AE. Updating the evidence that physical activity is good for health: an epidemiological review 2000–2003. J Sci Med Sport. 2004;7(1 Suppl):6–19. doi: 10.1016/S1440-2440(04)80273-1.
    1. Lee IM, Shiroma EJ, Lobelo F, Puska P, Blair SN, Katzmarzyk PT. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet. 2012;380(9838):219–29. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9.
    1. Dunstan DW, Howard B, Healy GN, Owen N. Too much sitting--a health hazard. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;97(3):368–76. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2012.05.020.
    1. Thorp AA, Owen N, Neuhaus M, Dunstan DW. Sedentary behaviors and subsequent health outcomes in adults a systematic review of longitudinal studies, 1996–2011. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41(2):207–15. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2011.05.004.
    1. Thorp AA, Healy GN, Winkler E, et al. Prolonged sedentary time and physical activity in workplace and non-work contexts: a cross-sectional study of office, customer service and call centre employees. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2012;9:128. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-9-128.
    1. van der Ploeg HP, Moller SV, Hannerz H, van der Beek AJ, Holtermann A. Temporal changes in occupational sitting time in the Danish workforce and associations with all-cause mortality: results from the Danish work environment cohort study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2015;12:71. doi: 10.1186/s12966-015-0233-1.
    1. van Uffelen JG, Wong J, Chau JY, et al. Occupational sitting and health risks: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2010;39(4):379–88. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2010.05.024.
    1. Gretebeck RJ, Montoye HJ. Variability of some objective measures of physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1992;24(10):1167–72. doi: 10.1249/00005768-199210000-00016.
    1. Jerome GJ, Young DR, Laferriere D, Chen C, Vollmer WM. Reliability of RT3 accelerometers among overweight and obese adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(1):110–4. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181846cd8.
    1. Levin S, Jacobs DR, Jr, Ainsworth BE, Richardson MT, Leon AS. Intra-individual variation and estimates of usual physical activity. Ann Epidemiol. 1999;9(8):481–8. doi: 10.1016/S1047-2797(99)00022-8.
    1. Matthews CE, Ainsworth BE, Thompson RW, Bassett DR., Jr Sources of variance in daily physical activity levels as measured by an accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002;34(8):1376–81. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200208000-00021.
    1. Aadland E, Ylvisaker E. Reliability of objectively measured sedentary time and physical activity in adults. PloS One. 2015;10(7):e0133296. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0133296.
    1. Hart TL, Swartz AM, Cashin SE, Strath SJ. How many days of monitoring predict physical activity and sedentary behaviour in older adults? Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:62. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-8-62.
    1. Danquah IH, Kloster S, Holtermann A, et al. Take a Stand!-a multi-component intervention aimed at reducing sitting time among office workers-a cluster randomized trial. Int J Epidemiol. 2016;1–13
    1. Actigraph. 2013. Available from: . Actgraph. Accessed 14 Nov 2015.
    1. Skotte J, Korshoj M, Kristiansen J, Hanisch C, Holtermann A. Detection of physical activity types using triaxial accelerometers. J Phys Act Health. 2014;11(1):76–84. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2011-0347.
    1. Ingebrigtsen J, Stemland I, Christensen C, et al. Validation of a commercial and Custom Made Accelerometer-Based Software for Step Count and Frequency during Walking and Running. J Ergon. 2013;3(2). .
    1. Stemland I, Ingebrigtsen J, Christiansen CS, et al. Validity of the Acti4 method for detection of physical activity types in free-living settings: comparison with video analysis. Ergonomics. 2015;58(6):953–65. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2014.998724.
    1. Baranowski T, Masse LC, Ragan B, Welk G. How many days was that? We're still not sure, but we're asking the question better! Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008;40(7 Suppl):S544–9. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e31817c6651.
    1. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:30–46. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30.
    1. Trost SG, McIver KL, Pate RR. Conducting accelerometer-based activity assessments in field-based research. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37(11 Suppl):S531–43. doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000185657.86065.98.
    1. Autenrieth CS, Baumert J, Baumeister SE, et al. Association between domains of physical activity and all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality. Eur J Epidemiol. 2011;26(2):91–9. doi: 10.1007/s10654-010-9517-6.
    1. Turi BC, Codogno JS, Fernandes RA, Sui X, Lavie CJ, Blair SN, Monteiro HL. Association of Different Physical Activity Domains on All-Cause Mortality in Adults Participating in Primary Care in the Brazilian National Health System: 4-year Follow-up. J Phys Act Health. 2016: 1–22. [Epub ahead of print]
    1. Huerta JM, Chirlaque MD, Tormo MJ, et al. Work, household, and leisure-time physical activity and risk of mortality in the EPIC-Spain cohort. Prev Med. 2016;85:106–12. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2016.02.009.
    1. Bingham DD, Costa S, Clemes SA, Routen AC, Moore HJ, Barber SE. Accelerometer data requirements for reliable estimation of habitual physical activity and sedentary time of children during the early years - a worked example following a stepped approach. J Sports Sci. 2016;34(20):2005–10. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2016.1149605.
    1. Mattocks C, Leary S, Ness A, et al. Intraindividual variation of objectively measured physical activity in children. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007;39(4):622–9. doi: 10.1249/mss.0b013e318030631b.
    1. Wickel EE, Welk GJ. Applying generalizability theory to estimate habitual activity levels. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2010;42(8):1528–34. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181d107c4.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.
    1. Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med. 2000;30(1):1–15. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200030010-00001.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir