BACKGROUND: Hospital stays are associated with high levels of sedentary behavior and physical inactivity. To objectively investigate physical behavior of hospitalized patients, these is a need for valid measurement instruments. The aim of this study was to assess the criterion validity of three accelerometers to measure lying, sitting, standing and walking. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was performed in a university hospital. Participants carried out several mobility tasks according to a structured protocol while wearing three accelerometers (ActiGraph GT9X Link, Activ8 Professional and Dynaport MoveMonitor). The participants were guided through the protocol by a test leader and were recorded on video to serve as reference. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV) were determined for the categories lying, sitting, standing and walking. RESULTS: In total 12 subjects were included with a mean age of 49.5 (SD 21.5) years and a mean body mass index of 23.8 kg/m2 (SD 2.4). The ActiGraph GT9X Link showed an excellent sensitivity (90%) and PPV (98%) for walking, but a poor sensitivity for sitting and standing (57% and 53%), and a poor PPV (43%) for sitting. The Activ8 Professional showed an excellent sensitivity for sitting and walking (95% and 93%), excellent PPV (98%) for walking, but no sensitivity (0%) and PPV (0%) for lying. The Dynaport MoveMonitor showed an excellent sensitivity for sitting (94%), excellent PPV for lying and walking (100% and 99%), but a poor sensitivity (13%) and PPV (19%) for standing. CONCLUSIONS: The validity outcomes for the categories lying, sitting, standing and walking vary between the investigated accelerometers. All three accelerometers scored good to excellent in identifying walking. None of the accelerometers were able to identify all categories validly.
Stroke is the second most common cause of death and the third leading cause of disability worldwide,1,2 with the burden expected to increase during the next 20 years.1 Almost 40% of the people with stroke have a recurrent stroke within 10 years,3 making secondary prevention vital.3,4 High amounts of sedentary time have been found to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease,5–11 particularly when the sedentary time is accumulated in prolonged bouts.12–15 Sedentary behavior, is defined as “any waking behavior characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METs) while in a sitting, reclining or lying posture”.16,17 Studies in healthy people, as well as people with diabetes and obesity, have shown that reducing the total amount of sedentary time and/or breaking up long periods of uninterrupted sedentary time, reduces metabolic risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease.6,9,10,12–15 Recent studies have shown that people living in the community after stroke spend more time each day sedentary, and more time in uninterrupted bouts of sedentary time compared to age-matched healthy peers.18–20 Reducing sedentary time and breaking up long sedentary bouts with short bursts of activity may be a promising intervention to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular diseases in people with stroke. To develop effective interventions, it is important to understand the factors associated with sedentary time in people with stroke. Previous studies have found associations between self-reported physical function after stroke and total sedentary time, but inconsistent results with regards to the relationship of age, stroke severity, and walking speed with sedentary time.20,21 These results are from secondary analyses of single-site observational studies, not powered to address associations, and inconsistent in the methods used to determine waking hours; thus making direct comparisons between studies difficult.20,21 Individual participant data pooling, with consistent processing of wake time data, allows novel exploratory analyses of larger datasets with greater power. By pooling all available individual participant data internationally, this study aimed to comprehensively explore the factors associated with sedentary time in community-dwelling people with stroke. Specifically, our research questions were: (1) What factors are associated with total sedentary time during waking hours after stroke? (2) What factors are associated with time spent in prolonged sedentary bouts during waking hours?
BACKGROUND: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are a key topic in occupational health. In the primary prevention of these disorders, interventions to minimize exposure to work-related physical risk factors are widely advocated. Besides interventions aimed at the work organisation and the workplace, interventions are also aimed at the behaviour of workers, the so-called individual working practice (IWP). At the moment, no conceptual framework for interventions for IWP exists. This study is a first step towards such a framework.METHODS: A scoping review was carried out starting with a systematic search in Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, Ovid APA PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Intervention studies aimed at reducing exposure to physical ergonomic risk factors involving the worker were included. The content of these interventions for IWP was extracted and coded in order to arrive at distinguishing and overarching categories of these interventions for IWP.RESULTS: More than 12.000 papers were found and 110 intervention studies were included, describing 810 topics for IWP. Eventually eight overarching categories of interventions for IWP were distinguished: (1) Workplace adjustment, (2) Variation, (3) Exercising, (4) Use of aids, (5) Professional skills, (6) Professional manners, (7) Task content & task organisation and (8) Motoric skills.CONCLUSION: Eight categories of interventions for IWP are described in the literature. These categories are a starting point for developing and evaluating effective interventions performed by workers to prevent WMSDs. In order to reach consensus on these categories, an international expert consultation is a necessary next step.KEYWORDS: Work related risk factors, Occupational training, Ergonomic interventions, Musculoskeletal diseases, Prevention and control
