Combining Actigraph Link and PetPace Collar Data to Measure Activity, Proximity, and Physiological Responses in Freely Moving Dogs in a Natural Environment

Abstract

Simple SummaryThe Actigraph accelerometry monitors, the most widely used and extensively validated devices for measuring physical activity in humans, have also been validated for use in dogs. The ActiGraph GT9X Link monitor has Bluetooth Smart technology and a proximity-tagging feature that potentially allows for the measurement of distance between subjects, e.g., between human caretakers and their dog(s). The PetPace Smart-collar is a non-invasive wireless collar that collects important health markers, including heart beats, variation in the intervals between heartbeats, breaths per minute, and position data (lying, sitting, standing), in addition to activity. The purpose of this study was to determine whether combining data from the Actigraph monitor and PetPace collar would provide reliable pulse, respiration, and heart rate variability results during various activity levels in dogs, and whether these variables were affected by the absence or presence of their caretakers.AbstractAlthough several studies have examined the effects of an owner’s absence and presence on a dog’s physiological responses under experimental conditions over short periods of time (minutes), little is known about the effects of proximity between humans and freely moving dogs under natural conditions over longer periods of time (days). The first aim of our study was to determine whether the combined data generated from the PetPace Collar and Actigraph Link accelerometer provide reliable pulse, respiration, and heart rate variability results during sedentary, light-moderate, and vigorous bouts in 11 freely moving dogs in a foster caretaker environment over 10–15 days. The second aim was to determine the effects of proximity (absence and presence of caretaker) and distance (caretaker and dog within 0–2 m) on the dogs’ physiological responses. Aim 1 results: Pulse and respiration were higher during light-moderate bouts compared to sedentary bouts, and higher at rest while the dogs were standing and sitting vs. lying. Heart rate variability (HRV) was not different between activity levels or position. Aim 2 results: During sedentary bouts, pulse and respiration were higher, and HRV lower, when there was a proximity signal (caretaker present) compared to no proximity signal (caretaker absent). Using multiple regression models, we found that activity, position, distance, and signal presence were predictors of physiological response in individual dogs during sedentary bouts. Our results suggest that combining data collected from Actigraph GT9X and PetPace monitors will provide useful information, both collectively and individually, on dogs’ physiological responses during activity, in various positions, and in proximity to their human caretaker.

Effects of Proximity between Companion Dogs and Their Caregivers on Heart Rate Variability Measures in Older Adults: A Pilot Study

“…The dog breeds included American Eskimo (n = 8), Papillon (n = 1), Yorkshire Terrier (n = 1) and mix-breed Terrier (n = 1). None of the dogs in this study were included in the previous study on the effects of proximity between foster caregivers and their dogs on the dogs' HRV [15]. There were no signs of adverse effects (e.g., allergic response, distress) of the collars on the dogs, and they all tolerated them without issue.…”

“…Dog participants wore an Actigraph GT9X Link accelerometer on their collar to measure physical activity (100 Hz sample rate) and proximity (beacon) and a PetPace Smart-collar to collect activity, position, pulse, and vasovagal tonus index (VVTI) at a sample rate of every two minutes as previously described [15]. Data were anaalyzed via ActiLife v6.13.4 and the PetPace Health Monitoring System.…”

“…For proximity tagging, the Link monitor set as "receiver" records the relative quality of the Bluetooth signal from the Link device set as "beacon." RSSI does not have an absolute value, and it does not correspond to a fixed spatial distance [21], although algorithms have be used to convert RSSI to distance within the first two meters [15]. In a validation study comparing location by wearable cameras and proximity tagging in office workers, the most accurate detection was when the participant was stationary [21].…”

“…It is important to note that ActiGraph recently (April 1, 2020) posted on their website that proximity data can be compromised when a single device is set to both receive and beacon simultaneously [22]. We have not used this option in the current study nor in our past study that utilized proximity tagging [15]. Moreover, our proximity data were verified to be accurate by a product support manager at ActiGraph.…”

“…To date, no studies have used proximity tagging technology to determine the effects of human-animal interaction on humans' health outcomes. We recently reported the effects of closeness and caregivers' presence on dogs' health outcomes using minute-by-minute proximity tagging [15]. This study was novel in several respects, notably measuring multiple outcomes (including HRV) and predictors/covariates minute-by-minute simultaneously in freely moving dogs over 10-15 days.…”