Comparison of Energy Expenditure Assessed Using Wrist- and Hip-Worn ActiGraph GT3X in Free-Living Conditions in Young and Older Adults

Abstract

The World Health Organization has presented their recommendations for energy expenditure to improve public health. Activity trackers do represent a modern solution for measuring physical activity, particularly in terms of steps/day and energy expended in physical activity (active energy expenditure). According to the manufacturer's instructions, these activity trackers can be placed on different body locations, mostly at the wrist and the hip, in an undifferentiated manner. The objective of this study was to compare the absolute error rate of active energy expenditure measured by a wrist-worn and hip-worn ActiGraph GT3X+ over a 24-h period in free-living conditions in young and older adults. Over the period of a 24-h period, 22 young adults and 22 older adults were asked to wear two ActiGraph GT3X+ at two different body locations recommended by the manufacturer, namely one around the wrist and one above the hip. Freedson algorithm was applied for data analysis. For both groups, the absolute error rate tended to decrease from 1,252 to 43% for older adults and from 408 to 46% for young participants with higher energy expenditure. Interestingly, for both young and older adults, the wrist-worn ActiGraph provided a significantly higher values of active energy expenditure (943 ± 264 cal/min) than the hip-worn (288 ± 181 cal/min). Taken together, these results suggest that caution is needed when using active energy expenditure as an activity tracker-based metric to quantify physical activity.

Influence of Epoch Length and Recording Site on the Relationship Between Tri-Axial Accelerometry-Derived Physical Activity Levels and Structural, Functional, and Hemodynamic Properties of Central and Peripheral Arteries

“…Our findings are in agreement with previous studies in which using the same devices (ActiGraph GT3X+) and processing option provided by the software (“Worn-to-wrist”), it was observed that compared to data derived from wrist-recordings, those obtained from hip records showed lower (i) PA-related EE (Guediri et al, 2021 ), (ii) MVPA% (Kamada et al, 2016 ), (iii) steps counts (Hildebrand et al, 2014 ; Tudor-Locke et al, 2015 ; Kamada et al, 2016 ; Migueles et al, 2017 ; Mandigout et al, 2019 ), and (iv) VM counts (Kamada et al, 2016 ). Additionally, our data showed that the differences would depend on the epoch length considered.…”

“…In addition, in general, the algorithms are not available but are properties of the manufacturer (Mandigout et al, 2019 ). In this context, it should be noted that since the level of PA is performed regardless of how it is measured, it is clear that in a given individual and condition, the mathematical algorithms should provide the same results for accelerometer-derived indices or outcome of interest (e.g., EE, time in MVPA, steps/min) regardless of the device-location (e.g., allowing the individuals to assess their PA and compliance with the international recommendations) (Guediri et al, 2021 ).…”

“…The same PA indices (EE, MVPA%, steps/minute, and VM CPM) were calculated for hip and wrist records. Similar to previous studies, according to the manufacturer's recommendations, for wrist-worm data, the “Worn on wrist” option (ActiLife software) was selected during data scoring (McMinn et al, 2013 ; Mueller et al, 2020 ; Nuss et al, 2020 ; Guediri et al, 2021 ). When that option is selected, ActiLife software applies “piece-wise scaling” to the collected data, enabling direct comparison between PA indices (e.g., EE) obtained from hip and wrist measurements (ActiGraph, 2021 ).…”

“…It is to be noted that, in theory, when the “Worn on wrist” option is selected, EE and MVPA% values obtained from wrist and hip recordings (for a participant in a given period) should be similar. However, this is a controversial issue that is still discussed and under investigation (Mueller et al, 2020 ; Nuss et al, 2020 ; Guediri et al, 2021 ). It is also to note that the “Worn on wrist” option does not modify the step/minute and VM CM data obtained at the wrist (Mueller et al, 2020 ).…”

“…Finally, the VM CPM was analyzed to obtain a continuous variable directly related to the accelerometer recordings, without being determined by modeling or by the participant characteristics. Thus, the PA indices considered included both indices whose calculations depend on the use of the “Worn on wrist” option (EE and MVPA%) and indices that do not depend on the selection of that option (steps/minute and VM CPM) (McMinn et al, 2013 ; Mueller et al, 2020 ; Nuss et al, 2020 ; Guediri et al, 2021 ).…”