Is Wrist Accelerometry Suitable for Threshold Scoring? A Comparison of Hip-Worn and Wrist-Worn ActiGraph Data in Low-Active Older Adults With Obesity.

Background: Hip- and wrist-worn ActiGraph accelerometers are widely used in research on physical activity as they offer an objective assessment of movement intensity across the day. Herein we characterize and contrast key structured physical activities and common activities of daily living via accelerometry data collected at the hip and wrist from a sample of community-dwelling older adults.

Methods: Low-active, older adults with obesity (age 60+ years) were fit with an ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer on their nondominant wrist and hip before completing a series of tasks in a randomized order, including sitting/standing, sweeping, folding laundry, stair climbing, ambulation at different intensities, and cycling at different intensities. Participants returned a week later and completed the tasks once again. Vector magnitude counts/second were time-matched during each task and then summarized into counts/minute (CPM).

Results: Monitors at both wear locations similarly characterized standing, sitting, and ambulatory tasks. A key finding was that light home chores (sweeping, folding laundry) produced higher and more variable CPM values than fast walking via wrist ActiGraph. Regression analyses revealed wrist CPM values were poor predictors of hip CPM values, with devices aligning best during fast walking (R2 = 0.25) and stair climbing (R2 = 0.35).

Conclusions: As older adults spend a considerable portion of their day in nonexercise activities of daily living, researchers should be cautious in the use of simply acceleration thresholds for scoring wrist-worn accelerometer data. Methods for better classifying wrist-worn activity monitor data in older adults are needed.