The study of physical activity in older adults is becoming more and more relevant. For evaluation of physical activity recommendations, intensity-specific accelerometer cut-points are utilized. However, research on accelerometer cut-points for older adults is still scarce. The aim of the study was to generate placement-specific cut-points of ActiGraph GT3X+ activity counts and raw measures of acceleration to determine physical activity intensity in older adults. A further aim was to compare the validity of the generated cut-points for a range of different physical activities. The study was a single experimental trial using a convenience sample. Study participants were 20 adults aged 59 to 73 years. Accelerometers were worn at six different placements (one on each wrist, one on each ankle, and two at the hip) and breath-by-breath indirect calorimetry was used as the reference for energy. The experiment comprised of two parts; a) The first required participants to walk on a treadmill at incremental speeds (3.0–5.0 km·h-1), and b) Five different everyday activities (reading, cleaning, shopping, cycling, aerobics) were staged in the laboratory setting. Accelerometer cut-points (activity counts, raw data) were derived for each of the investigated placements by linear regression using the treadmill part. Performance of the cut-points was assessed by applying the cut-points to the everyday activities. We provide cut-points for six placements and two accelerometer metrics in the specific age group. However, the derived cut-points did not outperform published ones. More research and innovative approaches are needed for improving internal and external validity of research results across populations and age groups.

Modern smartphones such as the iPhone contain an integrated accelerometer, which can be used to measure body movement and estimate the volume and intensity of physical activity. Objectives: The primary objective was to assess the validity of the iPhone to measure step count and energy expenditure during laboratory-based physical activities. A further objective was to compare free-living estimates of physical activity between the iPhone and the ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer. Methods: Twenty healthy adults wore the iPhone 5S and GT3X+ in a waist-mounted pouch during bouts of treadmill walking, jogging, and other physical activities in the laboratory. Step counts were manually counted, and energy expenditure was measured using indirect calorimetry. During two weeks of free-living, participants (n = 17) continuously wore a GT3X+ attached to their waist and were provided with an iPhone 5S to use as they would their own phone. Results: During treadmill walking, iPhone (703 ± 97 steps) and GT3X+ (675 ± 133 steps) provided accurate measurements of step count compared with the criterion method (700 ± 98 steps). Compared with indirect calorimetry (8 ± 3 kcal·min−1), the iPhone (5 ± 1 kcal·min−1) underestimated energy expenditure with poor agreement. During free-living, the iPhone (7,990 ± 4,673 steps·day−1) recorded a significantly lower (p < .05) daily step count compared with the GT3X+ (9,085 ± 4,647 steps·day−1). Conclusions: The iPhone accurately estimated step count during controlled laboratory walking but recorded a significantly lower volume of physical activity compared with the GT3X+ during free-living.

No abstract