Validity and reliability of accelerometry in identification of lying,sitting,standing or purposeful activity in adult hospital inpatients recovering from acute or critical illness: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective:

To investigate the validity and reliability of accelerometers to detect lying, sitting and standing postures or purposeful activity in hospitalized adults recovering from acute or critical illness.

Data sources:

CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, Cochrane Library, PEDro, PsycINFO and SPORTDiscuss were searched from inception to June 2017. Professional networks and reference lists of relevant articles were also searched. The main selection criteria were hospitalized adults with acute or critical illness and studies investigating the validity or reliability of accelerometers to identify body position or purposeful activity.

Review methods:

Two authors individually assessed study eligibility and independently undertook methodological quality assessment and data extraction from selected articles. A narrative synthesis of the data was undertaken.

Results:

Fifteen studies, collectively enrolling 385 hospitalized participants, were identified. Populations included stroke, the elderly, acute exacerbation of chronic respiratory disease, abdominal surgery and those recovering from critical illness. Correlations of r = 0.36 to 0.98 and levels of agreement of κ = 0.28 to 0.98 were reported for identification of lying, sitting or standing postures. Correlations of r = 0.4 to 0.8 with general activity were found, with r = 0.94 and 0.96 reported for step count. The reliability of accelerometry measurement was investigated in one study evaluating step count quantification (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.99–1.00).

Conclusion:

The validity of accelerometers to determine lying, sitting and standing postures or quantify purposeful activity within hospitalized acute or critically ill populations is variable. The reliability of accelerometry measurement within this setting remains largely unexplored.

Keywords

Accelerometer validity body position activity hospital inpatient

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Mudge

McRae

McHugh

et al . Poor mobility in hospitalized adults of all ages. J Hosp Med 2016; 11(4): 289–291.

Borges

Carvalho

Colombo

et al . Physical activity, muscle strength, and exercise capacity 3 months after severe sepsis and septic shock. Intensive Care Med 2015; 41(8): 1433–1444.

Graf

Functional decline in hospitalized older adults. Am J Nurs 2006; 106(1): 58–67.

Covinsky

Palmer

Fortinsky

et al . Loss of independence in activities of daily living in older adults hospitalized with medical illnesses: increased vulnerability with age. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003; 51(4): 451–458.

Sager

Dunham

Schwantes

et al . Measurement of activities of daily living in hospitalized elderly: a comparison of self-report and performance-based methods. J Am Geriatr Soc 1992; 40(5): 457–462.

Prince

Adamo

Hamel

et al . A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008; 5: 56, http://doi:10.1186/1479-5868-5-56 (accessed 16 October 2016).

Cheung

Gray

Karunanithi

Review article (meta-analysis): review of accelerometry for determining daily activity among elderly patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92: 998–1014.

World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.

Liberati

Altman

Tetzlaff

et al . The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151(4): W65–W94.

10.

Choquette

Hamel

Boissy

Accelerometer-based wireless body area network to estimate intensity of therapy in post-acute rehabilitation. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2008; 5: 20.

11.

Culhane

Lyons

Hilton

et al . Long-term mobility monitoring of older adults using accelerometers in a clinical environment. Clin Rehabil 2004; 18(3): 335–343.

12.

Nagels

Engelborghs

Vloeberghs

et al . Correlation between actigraphy and nurses’ observation of activity in dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 2007; 22(1): 84–86.

13.

Landis

Koch

GG.

The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33(1): 159–174.

14.

Taraldsen

Askim

Sletvold

et al . Evaluation of a body-worn sensor system to measure physical activity in older people with impaired function. Phys Ther 2011; 91(2): 277–285.

15.

Harris

Britton

Morrell

et al . Evaluation of a single axis accelerometry system for monitoring sit to stand activity in stroke patients. Clin Rehabil 2006; 20(7): 637–638.

16.

Godfrey

Conway

Leonard

et al . Motion analysis in delirium: a discrete approach in determining physical activity for the purpose of delirium motoric subtyping. Med Eng Phys 2010; 32(2): 101–110.

17.

Raymond

Winter

Holland

AE.

Validation of an activity monitor in older inpatients undergoing slow stream rehabilitation. J Phys Act Health 2015; 12(9): 1298–1303.

18.

Rowlands

Olds

Hillsdon

et al . Assessing sedentary behavior with the GENEActiv: introducing the sedentary sphere. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2014; 46(6): 1235–1247.

19.

Kramer

Cumming

Churilov

et al . Measuring activity levels at an acute stroke ward: comparing observations to a device. BioMed Res Int 2013; 2013: 460482.

20.

Pedersen

Bodilsen

Petersen

et al . Twenty-four-hour mobility during acute hospitalization in older medical patients. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2013; 68(3): 331–337.

21.

Brown

Roth

Allman

RM.

Validation of use of wireless monitors to measure levels of mobility during hospitalization. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008; 45(4): 551–558.

22.

Edbrooke

Lythgo

Goldsworthy

et al . Can an accelerometer-based monitor be used to accurately assess physical activity in a population of survivors of critical illness? Glob J Health Sci 2012; 4(3): 98–107.

23.

Webber

St John

PD.

Comparison of ActiGraph GT3X+ and StepWatch step count accuracy in geriatric rehabilitation patients. J Aging Phys Act 2016; 24(3): 451–458.

24.

Bisgaard

Kjaersgaard

Bernhard

et al . Computerized monitoring of physical activity and sleep in postoperative abdominal surgery patients. J Clin Monit Comput 1999; 15(1): 1–8.

25.

Winkelman

Higgins

Chen

YK.

Activity in the chronically critically ill. Dimens Crit Care Nurs 2005; 24(6): 281–290.

26.

Charlotte

Edwardson

EAHW

Danielle

et al . Considerations when using the activPAL monitor in field-based research with adult populations. J Health Sport Sci 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jshs.2016.02.002 (accessed 26 November 2016).

27.

Lyden

John

Dall

et al . Differentiating sitting and lying using a thigh-worn accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2016; 48(4): 742–747.

28.

Fortune

Lugade

Kaufman

KR.

Posture and movement classification: the comparison of tri-axial accelerometer numbers and anatomical placement. J Biomech Eng 2014; 136(5): 051003.

29.

Atallah

King

et al . Sensor positioning for activity recognition using wearable accelerometers. IEEE T Biomed Circ S 2011; 5(4): 320–329.

30.

Preece

Goulermas

Kenney

et al . A comparison of feature extraction methods for the classification of dynamic activities from accelerometer data. IEEE T Bio-Med Eng 2009; 56(3): 871–879.

31.

Feito

Garner

Bassett

DR.

Evaluation of ActiGraph’s low-frequency filter in laboratory and free-living environments. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2015; 47(1): 211–217.

32.

Taraldsen

Chastin

Riphagen

et al . Physical activity monitoring by use of accelerometer-based body-worn sensors in older adults: a systematic literature review of current knowledge and applications. Maturitas 2012; 71(1): 13–19.

33.

Gebruers

Vanroy

Truijen

et al . Monitoring of physical activity after stroke: a systematic review of accelerometry-based measures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91(2): 288–297.

34.

Verceles

Hager

ER.

Use of accelerometry to monitor physical activity in critically ill subjects: a systematic review. Respir Care 2015; 60(9): 1330–1336.

35.

McCullagh

Brady

Dillon

et al . A review of the accuracy and utility of motion sensors to measure physical activity of frail, older hospitalized patients. J Aging Phys Act 2016; 24(3): 465–475.

36.

Storti

Pettee

Brach

et al . Gait speed and step-count monitor accuracy in community-dwelling older adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2008; 40(1): 59–64.

37.

Barreira

Brouillette

Foil

et al . Comparison of older adults’ steps per day using NL-1000 pedometer and two GT3X+ accelerometer filters. J Aging Phys Act 2013; 21(4): 402–416.

38.

Webber

Magill

Schafer

et al . GT3X+ accelerometer, Yamax pedometer and SC-StepMX pedometer step count accuracy in community-dwelling older adults. J Aging Phys Act 2014; 22(3): 334–341.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB

0.36 MB