Validity of the activPAL and ActiGraph for measuring sitting time and steps in hospitalised orthopaedic patients with altered weight bearing

Abstract

Purpose

To determine the criterion validity of the activPAL and ActiGraph for measuring steps and sitting/sedentary time, compared to observation, in people hospitalised following orthopaedic lower limb injury who were weight bearing (WB) (i.e., walking) or non-weight bearing (NWB) (i.e., hopping).

Materials and methods

Participants wore an activPAL and ActiGraph on the hip/thigh/unaffected (UA)/affected ankle (AA) while completing bouts of walking and sitting. Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient, Bland–Altman methods, and ratio of agreement were used to compare device-measured to observed (videoed) step count, sitting/sedentary time.

Results

In 42 participants, the ActiGraph demonstrated excellent concordance with the observed step count when worn on the ankle (LCC 0.91–0.92) compared to the hip (LCC 0.56) in participants that were WB. The ActiGraph AA achieved the highest concordance (LCC 0.71) with observed steps in participants NWB. The activPAL had poor concordance with observed steps, particularly at slow gait speeds, in participants that were WB (LCC 0.38–0.46), however was less influenced by gait speed and had good concordance in NWB participants (LCC 0.52–0.69). The activPAL (LCC 0.79–0.88) and ActiGraph UA (LCC 0.94) showed excellent concordance with observed sitting and sedentary time, respectively.

Conclusions

The ActiGraph worn at the ankle provided the most valid measure of steps in people who are WB and NWB following orthopaedic injury, while the activPAL was best for measuring sitting time.

Implications for rehabilitation

• To accurately measure both steps and sitting time in people with lower limb orthopaedic injuries, a combination of activity monitors should be used (i.e., ActiGraph for steps, activPAL for sitting time).

• The ActiGraph device when worn on the ankle demonstrated the strongest agreement with observed step count in people who were weight bearing and non-weight bearing.

• Caution is needed when using thigh- or hip-worn devices in people who walk slowly.

Keywords:

• Physical activity
• sedentary behaviour
• orthopaedic injury
• hospitalisation
• activity monitors

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Alfred Human Research Ethics Committee (registration approval number 189/21).

Disclosure statement

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Funding

There was no funding for this study.