Objective Physical Activity Monitoring for Health-Related Research: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Objective Physical Activity Monitoring for Health-Related Research: A Discussion of Methods, Deployments, and Data Presentations John M. Schuna Jr., PhD School of Biological and Population Health Sciences Oregon State University, Corvallis OR

What is Objective Physical Activity Monitoring ?

What is Objective Physical Activity Monitoring ? • Measure of physical activity behavior - - not fitness • Mechanical and electronic devices are used to characterize physical activity behavior • 4-14 day data collection periods are common in free-living • Waist and wrist are most common locations to wear devices

Objective Physical Activity Monitors

Monitor Device Types • Pedometers • Step counters (electronic or electromechanical) • Accelerometers • Measure acceleration as a marker of physical activity • Predict energy expenditure • Also capable of counting steps • Multi-sensor devices (wearables) • Combine multiple sensor inputs • Predict energy expenditure • Count steps • Predict type of activity

Common Devices - Pedometers Device Wear Location Outputs Sensors Cost Yamax SW-200 Spring-lever Step Waist Steps $20.00 Counter Omron HJ-151 Steps, Piezoelectric Waist $30.00 Moderate Steps Accelerometer NL-1000 Steps, Distance, Piezoelectric Waist $54.95 Active Minutes Accelerometer

Common Devices - Accelerometers Device Wear Location Outputs Sensors Cost GT9X Link Steps, Activity Accelerometer, Waist / Wrist Counts, Raw magnetometer, $275 Ankle / Thigh gyroscope Accel ActivPAL Thigh Posture, Steps $493 Accelerometer GENEActiv Waist / Wrist Raw Accel $248 Accelerometer Ankle / Thigh Axivity Waist / Wrist Raw Accel Accelerometer $141 Ankle / Thigh 6

Common Devices - Wearables Device Wear Outputs Sensors Cost Location Fitbit Zip / One Steps, Stairs, Distance, Active Waist $50 / $100 Accelerometer Minutes, Sleep, Calories Jawbone UP3 Steps, Distance, Wrist Active time, Accelerometer $50 Sleep, Calories Withings Pulse O 2 Steps, Distance, Accelerometer, Wrist $100 Infrared O 2 Sensor Calories, HR, O 2 Sats Apple Watch Steps, HR, Accelerometer, Wrist Movement $300 7 Photoplethysmograph Mode, Calories

How Do Modern Objective Physical Activity Monitors Work and What Data Do They Give Us?

Accelerometer Data Waist Wrist

Accelerometer Data Waist Wrist

Raw Acceleration Data 2.0 Steps 1.8 1.6 Acceleration (g-force) 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0

Raw Acceleration Data 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 Acceleration (g-force) Acceleration (g-force) Acceleration (g-force) Acceleration (g-force) 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.8 -0.8 -0.8 -0.8 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0 -1.0

How Are Objective Physical Activity Monitors Typically Deployed?

Large Scale Deployments • National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) Males Females • Coronary Artery Risk Compliance (%) 100 Development in Young Adults 80 (CARDIA) 60 40 20 • Reasons for Geographic and 0 Racial Differences in Stroke 6-11 12-15 16-19 20-59 60+ (REGARDS) • Lifestyle Interventions and Independent for Elders (LIFE) Troiano et al. (2008). MSSE; Pahor et al. (2014). JAMA

Smaller Deployments Physical Activity During • Thousands upon thousands of an After-School Program 26.9 smaller research applications 30 18.4 • Pre-school aged children Minutes 20 • Older adults 7.6 10 2.9 • Old-order Amish 0 < 1.5 1.5-2.9 3.0-5.9 6+ • Non-research behavioral METs interventions and health Mean Daily Steps Among Old Order Amish promotion programs 18,425 20000 • Individualized pedometer-based 14,196 interventions 15000 • Worksite health promotion 10000 challenges 5000 • Etc. 0 Men Women Schuna et al. (2013). J Sch Health; Bassett et al. (2004). MSSE

Objective Physical Activity Monitoring Tips • Identify your target population and the physical activity outcome you want to measure • Select measurement tool based upon….. • Outcome you want to measure • Characteristics of your target population/environment • Available resources • Validity/reliability evidence • Design the measurement protocol • How will the device be worn? • How long will the protocol last? • How will devices be retrieved?

How Many Days of Data Do I Need? Reliability of Accelerometer-determined MVPA 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 G Coefficients 0.6 ≥ 7 days to achieve 0.5 ≥ 0.80 reliability 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Number of Days of Monitoring Barreira, Schuna Jr., Tudor-Locke, et al. (2015). IJO

Objective Physical Activity Monitoring Tips • Implementation of the measurement protocol • Strategies to increase compliance to the monitoring regimen • Planning for device malfunctions and losses • Data processing and reduction • Data analysis and presentation

How Are Objective Physical Activity Monitoring Data Typically Presented?

Objective Monitoring Data Presentations • Average per day summaries (means) over the monitoring frame (e.g., 7-days) are most typical • Graphical displays • Tabular presentations Schuna et al. (2013). IJBNPA

The WAVE~Ripples for Change: Obesity Prevention in Active Youth The WAVE study USDA 2013-67001-20418

WAVE

WAVE • Physical activity monitoring via Fitbit Zip • Wireless data capture • Integrated system to feed data back into the intervention

CLOUD User’s data captured via Bluetooth and stored on Fitbit server. Data retrieved by request. Data, Charts, Progress

Daily/Weekly Data Reports

WAVE Study Health Report John Doe High School

CLOUD User’s data captured via Bluetooth and stored on Fitbit server. Data retrieved by request. Data, Charts, Progress

Acknowledgments OSU LSU - PBRC Siew Sun Wong, PhD Bill Johnson, PhD Melinda Manore, PhD Peter Katzmarzyk, PhD Chris Scaffidi, PhD Stephanie Broyles, PhD Kathy Gunter, PhD Emily Mire, MS Evan Hilberg, MS, MPH Syracuse University Rahul Patel, BS Tiago Barreira, PhD Umass-Amherst Catrine Tudor-Locke, PhD Patty Freedson, PhD John Staudenmayer, PhD Michael Busa, PhD Michael Green, MS

References 1. Troiano, R.P, Berrigan, D., Dodd, K.W., et al. (2008). Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 40 (1), 181-188. 2. Pahor, M., Guralnik, J. M., Ambrosius, W. T., et al. (2014). Effect of structured physical activity on prevention of major mobility disability in older adults: The LIFE study randomized clinical trial. JAMA, 311 (23), 2387-2396. 3. Schuna, J. M., Jr., Lauersdorf, R. L., Behrens, T. K., et al. (2013). An objective assessment of children’s physical activity during the Keep It Moving! after-school program. Journal of School Health, 83 (2), 105-111. 4. Bassett, D. R., Schneider, P. L., & Huntington, G. E. (2004). Physical activity in an Old Order Amish community. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 36 (1), 79-85. 5. Barreira, T.V., Schuna, J.M., Tudor-Locke, C. (2015). Reliability of accelerometer- determined physical activity and sedentary behavior in school-aged children: A 12- country study. International Journal of Obesity, 5, S29-S35. 6. Schuna, J. M., Jr., Johnson, W. D., & Tudor-Locke, C. (2013). Adult self-reported and objectively monitored physical activity and sedentary behavior: NHANES 2004- 2006. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 10, 126.

Objective Physical Activity Monitoring for Health-Related Research: A Discussion of Methods, Deployments, and Data Presentations John M. Schuna Jr., PhD School of Biological and Population Health Sciences Oregon State University, Corvallis OR