加速度计测评方法对学龄儿童久坐行为和身体活动测评结果的影响

项诚; 高莹; 李青阳; 赵晗华

doi:10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024383

加速度计测评方法对学龄儿童久坐行为和身体活动测评结果的影响

doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2024383

浙江大学教育学院，杭州 310058

基金项目:

国家自然科学基金项目 82003485

国家自然科学基金项目 82111530074

详细信息

作者简介:
项诚(2002-)，男，江苏苏州人，在读本科

通讯作者:
高莹，E-mail: yigao@zju.edu.cn

利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。
中图分类号: R179 G806 G804.49
计量
- 文章访问数: 185
- HTML全文浏览量: 65
- PDF下载量: 29
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2024-08-07
- 修回日期: 2024-10-13
- 网络出版日期: 2025-01-07
- 刊出日期: 2024-12-25

Effect of accelerometer assessment methods on the evaluation results of sedentary behaviour and physical activity in school-aged children

College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou (310058), Zhejiang Province, China

摘要

摘要: 目的探索加速度计不同配戴部位、采样间隔和切点对测评学龄儿童久坐行为(SB)、低强度身体活动(LPA)和中高强度身体活动(MVPA)的影响，为优化加速度计测评学龄儿童SB和身体活动的标准提供参考。方法 2021年5月至2022年9月，从杭州市某小学方便抽取110名8~12岁学龄儿童为研究对象，学龄儿童在校期间于髋部、背部、大腿、手腕4个部位配戴加速度计, 采集数据转化为6种采样间隔数据集(1，5，10，15，30，60 s)，比较Puyau、Freedson、Evenson、Pulsford 4种常见切点(共96种组合)SB、LPA和MVPA时间占比。使用三因素重复测量方差分析不同配戴部位、采样间隔和切点及其交互作用对测评结果的影响，使用Bonferroni事后检验分析组间多重比较的差异性。结果除切点×配戴部位×采样间隔对SB占比的交互作用和采样间隔对MVPA占比的主效应均无统计学意义外(F值分别为0.66，1.18，P值均>0.05)，3个因素对测评结果其余的主效应与交互作用均有统计学意义(F=6.28~11 662.28，P值均 < 0.01)。不同配戴部位结果差异均有统计学意义(F=90.98~308.79，P值均 < 0.01)。SB和MVPA占比随采样间隔的增加而下降, LPA占比则随着采样间隔增加而上升(F=16.54~676.35，P值均 < 0.01)。不同切点测评结果差异有统计学意义(F=98.14~976.40，P值均 < 0.01)。结论配戴部位、采样间隔与切点的加速度计方法学因素会影响学龄儿童SB和PA的估计值。未来研究需要优化加速度计分析方法在学龄儿童的适用性，谨慎对待不同研究之间的结果。
- 久坐生活方式 /
- 运动活动 /
- 方差分析 /
- 儿童
Abstract: Objective To explore the effects of different positions, epoch lengths and cut points of accelerometers on the measurement of sedentary behaviour (SB), light physical activity (LPA) and moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in school-aged children, so as to provide a reference for optimizing the criteria of accelerometers to measure SB and physical activity in school-aged children. Methods From May 2021 to September 2022, 110 school-aged children aged 8-12 years old were convenient selected from a primary school in Hangzhou, and the accelerometers were worn on the waist, back, thigh, and wrist during the school time, and the collected data were transformed into six datasets with different epoch lengths (1, 5, 10, 15, 30, and 60 s) and compared using 4 common cut-points developed by Puyau, Freedson, Evenson, and Pulsford (a total of 96 combinations) for classifying the percentages of time spent in SB, LPA, and MVPA. The effects of different positions, epoch lengths and cut points and their interactions on the assessment results were analyzed using a three-way repeated measures ANOVA, and the variability of multiple comparisons between groups was analyzed using a Bonferroni post-hoc test. Results Except for the interaction of cut point × position × epoch on the percentage of time spent in SB and the main effect of epoch on he percentage of time spent in MVPA were not statistically significant (F=0.66, 1.18, P>0.05), the remaining main effects and interactions of the three factors on the assessment results were all statistically significant (F=6.28-11 662.28, P < 0.01). The differences between the results of different positions were statistically significant (F=90.98-308.79, P < 0.01). The percentages of time spent in SB and MVPA decreased with the increase of epoch lengths, while the percentage of time spent in LPA increased with the increase of epoch lengths (F=16.54-676.35, P < 0.01). The difference between the results using different cut points measurements was statistically significant (F=98.14-976.40, P < 0.01). Conclusions Accelerometer methodological factors including positions, epoch lengths and cut points will affect the estimates of SB and physical activity in school-aged children. Therefore, it is recommended that future studies need to optimize the applicability of accelerometer analysis methods in school-aged children, and the comparisons of results between studies need to be treated with caution.
- Sedentary lifestyle /
- Motor activity /
- Analysis of variance /
- Child
注释:

1) 利益冲突声明 所有作者声明无利益冲突。

HTML全文

表 1 学龄儿童加速度计测量1 s采样间隔下不同切点不同配戴部位的SB和PA占比比较(x ±s，%)

Table 1. Comparison of SB and PA proportions by epoch in 1 s among school-aged children measured by acclerometers at different positions using different cut points(x ±s, %)

切点	配戴部位	人数	统计值	SB	LPA	MVPA
Evenson	髋部	90		70.10±0.85	23.16±0.61	6.75±0.32
	背部	60		74.33±0.80	19.39±0.60	6.29±0.30
	大腿	107		76.31±0.83	13.97±0.50	9.73±0.44
	手腕	72		45.47±1.17	34.01±0.64	20.52±0.70
			F值	156.36	184.80	128.33
Pulsford	髋部	90		70.10±0.85	22.85±0.61	7.06±0.33
	背部	60		74.03±0.85	19.35±0.63	6.62±0.32
	大腿	107		76.31±0.83	13.82±0.49	9.88±0.44
	手腕	72		45.23±1.15	33.34±0.62	21.44±0.70
			F值	156.09	200.95	116.54
Freedson	髋部	90		72.34±0.81	6.49±0.19	21.17±0.68
	背部	60		76.02±0.75	5.27±0.18	18.71±0.62
	大腿	107		77.89±0.78	4.60±0.18	17.51±0.65
	手腕	72		46.96±1.16	8.28±0.16	44.76±1.09
			F值	162.31	90.98	150.32
Puyau	髋部	90		82.01±0.61	14.56±0.45	3.43±0.20
	背部	60		83.99±0.59	12.59±0.44	3.43±0.19
	大腿	107		84.52±0.61	7.70±0.29	7.78±0.38
	手腕	72		57.45±1.06	42.29±1.07	0.26±0.26
			F值	167.13	308.79	98.14
注：P值均 < 0.01。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 学龄儿童加速度计测量Evenson切点不同采样间隔下不同配戴部位的SB和PA占比比较(x ±s，%)

Table 2. Comparison of SB and PA proportions by Evenson cut point in school-aged children measured by acclerometers at different positions using different epochs(x ±s, %)

采样间隔/s	配戴部位	人数	统计值	SB	LPA	MVPA
1	髋部	90		70.10±0.85	23.16±0.61	6.75±0.32
	背部	60		74.33±0.80	19.39±0.60	6.29±0.30
	大腿	107		76.31±0.83	13.97±0.50	9.73±0.44
	手腕	72		45.47±1.17	34.01±0.64	20.52±0.70
			F值	156.36	184.80	128.33
5	髋部	90		66.57±0.95	28.84±0.77	4.59±0.31
	背部	60		70.53±0.88	25.15±0.74	4.33±0.28
	大腿	107		71.38±0.96	19.35±0.66	9.27±0.46
	手腕	72		35.43±1.26	44.87±0.80	19.70±0.79
			F值	192.35	179.50	131.14
10	髋部	90		61.11±1.07	35.00±0.91	3.90±0.30
	背部	60		65.72±0.99	30.66±0.88	3.62±0.28
	大腿	107		66.04±1.12	24.87±0.84	9.09±0.47
	手腕	72		27.77±1.30	53.82±0.93	18.42±0.84
			F值	197.00	162.58	118.36
15	髋部	90		58.36±1.14	38.18±1.00	3.46±0.30
	背部	60		63.22±1.06	33.52±0.95	3.26±0.28
	大腿	107		63.15±1.18	27.88±0.92	8.97±0.49
	手腕	72		23.25±1.32	59.31±1.01	17.44±0.84
			F值	207.22	168.74	112.48
30	髋部	90		53.57±1.26	43.61±1.14	2.82±0.27
	背部	60		58.74±1.17	38.60±1.08	2.66±0.26
	大腿	107		57.82±1.33	33.55±1.07	8.63±0.50
	手腕	72		15.95±1.31	68.44±1.13	15.61±0.86
			F值	217.11	167.64	95.65
60	髋部	90		48.97±1.41	48.66±1.31	2.37±0.27
	背部	60		54.75±1.27	38.70±1.21	2.07±0.25
	大腿	107		52.66±1.44	43.18±1.19	8.64±0.52
	手腕	72		10.13±1.23	75.62±1.19	14.26±0.89
注：P值均 < 0.01。

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 学龄儿童加速度计测量髋部不同切点不同采样间隔的SB和PA占比比较(x ±s，%)

Table 3. Comparison of SB and PA proportions by accelerometer in hip of school-aged children at different tangent points and different sampling intervals(x ±s, %)

切点	采样间隔/s	统计值	SB	LPA	MVPA
Evenson	1		70.10±0.85	23.16±0.61	6.75±0.32
(n=90)	5		66.57±0.95	28.84±0.77	4.59±0.31
	10		61.11±1.07	35.00±0.91	3.90±0.30
	15		58.36±1.14	38.18±1.00	3.46±0.30
	30		53.57±1.26	43.61±1.14	2.82±0.27
	60		48.97±1.41	48.66±1.31	2.37±0.27
		F值	416.00^**	470.68^**	145.59^**
Pulsford	1		70.10±0.85	22.85±0.61	7.06±0.33
(n=90)	5		67.31±6.87	28.04±5.65	4.65±2.40
	10		61.80±7.85	34.27±6.87	3.93±2.39
	15		58.59±8.45	37.90±7.58	3.50±2.42
	30		53.76±9.41	43.37±8.68	2.87±2.25
	60		48.93±10.63	48.60±9.85	2.47±2.39
		F值	411.88^**	470.66^**	155.75^**
Freedson	1		72.34±0.81	6.49±0.19	21.17±0.68
(n=90)	5		69.42±6.62	9.05±2.10	21.53±5.39
	10		65.03±7.50	12.43±2.99	22.54±5.82
	15		62.88±7.98	14.05±3.56	23.06±6.07
	30		59.26±8.98	16.9±4.92	23.77±6.54
	60		55.74±9.89	19.48±5.87	24.78±7.08
		F值	327.14^**	246.92^**	68.06^**
Puyau	1		82.01±0.61	14.56±0.45	3.43±0.20
(n=90)	5		82.95±4.76	15.36±3.88	1.70±1.21
	10		82.77±5.21	15.98±4.45	1.25±1.08
	15		82.67±5.45	16.31±4.80	1.02±0.99
	30		82.67±5.89	16.62±5.37	0.70±0.85
	60		82.65±6.43	16.86±6.00	0.50±0.80
		F值	1.71	16.54^**	102.86^**
注：^** P < 0.01。

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(34)

[1]	李培红, 王梅. 中国儿童青少年身体活动现状及相关影响因素[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2016, 37(6): 805-809, 813. doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2016.06.002 LI P H, WANG M. Investigation on Chinese children and youth physical activity status and influence factors[J]. Chin J Sch Health, 2016, 37(6): 805-809, 813. (in Chinese) doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2016.06.002
[2]	HALLAL P C, ANDERSEN L B, BULL F C, et al. Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects[J]. Lancet, 2012, 380(9838): 247-257. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60646-1
[3]	CHAPUT J P, WILLUMSEN J, BULL F, et al. 2020 WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour for children and adolescents aged 5-17 years: summary of the evidence[J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 2020, 17(1): 141. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-01037-z
[4]	张云婷, 马生霞, 陈畅, 等. 中国儿童青少年身体活动指南[J]. 中国循证儿科杂志, 2017, 12(6): 401-409. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2017.06.001 ZHANG Y T, MA S X, CHEN C, et al. Physical activity guidelines for Chinese children and adolescents[J]. Chin J Evid Based Pediatr, 2017, 12(6): 401-409. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5501.2017.06.001
[5]	孙建刚, 柯友枝, 洪金涛, 等. 利器还是噱头: 可穿戴设备在身体活动测量中的信效度[J]. 上海体育学院学报, 2019, 43(6): 29-38. SUN J G, KE Y Z, HONG J T, et al. Sharp weapon or trick: reliability and validity of wearable devices in physical activity measurement[J]. J Shanghai Univ Sport, 2019, 43(6): 29-38. (in Chinese)
[6]	CHEN H, LIU J, BAI Y. Global accelerometer-derived physical activity levels from preschoolers to adolescents: a multilevel Meta-analysis and Meta-regression[J]. Ann Behav Med, 2023, 57(7): 511-529. doi: 10.1093/abm/kaac030
[7]	ARVIDSSON D, FRIDOLFSSON J, BÖRJESSON M, et al. Re-examination of accelerometer data processing and calibration for the assessment of physical activity intensity[J]. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2019, 29(10): 1442-1452. doi: 10.1111/sms.13470
[8]	温煦, 袁冰, 李华, 等. 论智能可穿戴设备在我国体力活动大数据分析中的应用[J]. 中国体育科技, 2017, 53(2): 80-87. WEN X, YUAN B, LI H, et al. Application of smart wearable devices in the big data analysis of physical activity in China[J]. China Sport Sci Technol, 2017, 53(2): 80-87. (in Chinese)
[9]	王超, 陈佩杰, 庄洁, 等. 加速度计以不同采样间隔测量儿童青少年日常体力活动时间的一致性研究[J]. 中国运动医学杂志, 2012, 31(9): 759-765, 771. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6710.2012.09.001 WANG C, CHEN P J, ZHUANG J, et al. The consistency of physical activity durations measured by accelerometer with different epochs for children and adolescents[J]. Chin J Sports Med, 2012, 31(9): 759-765, 771. (in Chinese) doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6710.2012.09.001
[10]	BANDA J A, HAYDEL K F, DAVILA T, et al. Effects of varying epoch lengths, wear time algorithms, and activity cut-points on estimates of child sedentary behavior and physical activity from accelerometer data[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(3): e0150534. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150534
[11]	DUNCAN M J, ROSCOE C M P, FAGHY M, et al. Estimating physical activity in children aged 8-11 years using accelerometry: contributions from fundamental movement skills and different accelerometer placements[J]. Front Physiol, 2019(10): 242.
[12]	贺刚, 黄雅君, 王香生. 加速度计在儿童体力活动测量中的应用[J]. 体育科学, 2011, 31(8): 72-77. HE G, HUANG Y J, WANG X S. Physical activity assessment using accelerometers among children[J]. China Sport Sci, 2011, 31(8): 72-77. (in Chinese)
[13]	陈庆果, 李翔. 配戴部位对加速度计能耗监测准确性的影响: 算法的调节效应[J]. 中国体育科技, 2019, 55(3): 73-81. CHEN Q G, LI X. Effects of wearing sites of accelerometer on accuracy prediction of energy expenditure: moderating effect of algorithm[J]. Chin Sport Sci Technol, 2019, 55(3): 73-81. (in Chinese)
[14]	SCHNELLER M B, BENTSEN P, NIELSEN G, et al. Measuring children's physical activity: compliance using skin-taped accelerometers[J]. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2017, 49(6): 1261-1269.
[15]	PUYAU M R, ADOLPH A L, VOHRA F A, et al. Validation and calibration of physical activity monitors in children[J]. Obes Res, 2002, 10(3): 150-157.
[16]	FREEDSON P, POBER D, JANZ K F. Calibration of accelerometer output for children[J]. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2005, 37(11 Suppl): S523-S530.
[17]	EVENSON K R, CATELLIER D J, GILL K, et al. Calibration of two objective measures of physical activity for children[J]. J Sports Sci, 2008, 26(14): 1557-1565.
[18]	PULSFORD R M, CORTINA-BORJA M, RICH C, et al. Actigraph accelerometer-defined boundaries for sedentary behaviour and physical activity intensities in 7 year old children[J]. PLoS One, 2011, 6(8): e21822.
[19]	BARNETT L M, VERSWIJVEREN S, COLVIN B, et al. Motor skill competence and moderate- and vigorous-intensity physical activity: a linear and non-linear cross-sectional analysis of eight pooled trials[J]. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act, 2024, 21(1): 14.
[20]	YOU Y. Accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary behaviour are associated with C-reactive protein in US adults who get insufficient sleep: a threshold and isotemporal substitution effect analysis[J]. J Sports Sci, 2024, 42(6): 527-536.
[21]	PEDERSEN N H, GRØNTVED A, BRØND J C, et al. Effect of nationwide school policy on device-measured physical activity in Danish children and adolescents: a natural experiment[J]. Lancet Reg Health Eur, 2023, 26: 100575.
[22]	GAO Z, LIU W, MCDONOUGH D J, et al. The dilemma of analyzing physical activity and sedentary behavior with wrist accelerometer data: challenges and opportunities[J]. J Clin Med, 2021, 10(24): 5951.
[23]	解浩东, 尚尧, 欧阳一毅, 等. 三轴加速度计配戴身体不同位置不同运动条件下能量消耗的变异性[J]. 中国组织工程研究, 2023, 27(23): 3707-3713. XIE H D, SHANG Y, OUYANG Y Y, et al. Tri-axial accelerometer placed at different locations of the body to assess the variation of energy expenditure under different exercise conditions[J]. Chin J Tissue Eng Res, 2023, 27(23): 3707-3713. (in Chinese)
[24]	ROSENBERGER M E, HASKELL W L, ALBINALI F, et al. Estimating activity and sedentary behavior from an accelerometer on the hip or wrist[J]. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2013, 45(5): 964-975.
[25]	FAIRCLOUGH S J, NOONAN R, ROWLANDS A V, et al. Wear compliance and activity in children wearing wrist- and hip-mounted accelerometers[J]. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2016, 48(2): 245-253.
[26]	SANDERS T, CLIFF D P, LONSDALE C. Measuring adolescent boys' physical activity: bout length and the influence of accelerometer epoch length[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(3): e92040.
[27]	EDWARDSON C L, GORELY T. Epoch length and its effect on physical activity intensity[J]. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2010, 42(5): 928-934.
[28]	AIBAR A, BOIS J E, ZARAGOZA J, et al. Do epoch lengths affect adolescents' compliance with physical activity guidelines?[J]. J Sports Med Phys Fitness, 2014, 54(3): 326-334.
[29]	GAO Y, MELIN M, MÄKÄRÄINEN K, et al. Children's physical activity and sedentary time compared using assessments of accelerometry counts and muscle activity level[J]. PeerJ, 2018(6): e5437.
[30]	常振亚, 王树明. 学龄前儿童身体活动采样间隔和强度分界值的适用性研究[J]. 中国体育科技, 2022, 58(6): 17-25. CHANG Z Y, WANG S M. Applicability of sampling interval and intensity cutoff value of physical activity in preschool children[J]. China Sport Sci Technol, 2022, 58(6): 17-25. (in Chinese)
[31]	ZHU Z, CHEN P, ZHUANG J. Intensity classification accuracy of accelerometer-measured physical activities in Chinese children and youth[J]. Res Q Exerc Sport, 2013, 84 (Suppl 2): S4-S11.
[32]	GAO Y, CRONIN N J, NEVALA N, et al. Validity of long-term and short-term recall of occupational sitting time in Finnish and Chinese office workers[J]. J Sport Health Sci, 2020, 9(4): 345-351.
[33]	MIGUELES J H, AADLAND E, ANDERSEN L B, et al. GRANADA consensus on analytical approaches to assess associations with accelerometer-determined physical behaviours (physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep) in epidemiological studies[J]. Br J Sports Med, 2022, 56(7): 376-384.
[34]	郭强, 汪晓赞. 儿童青少年身体活动研究的国际发展趋势与热点解析: 基于流行病学的视角[J]. 体育科学, 2015, 35(7): 58-73. GUO Q, WANG X Z. Research on international development and hot spot of physical activity for children and adolescents from the epidemiological perspectives[J]. China Sport Sci, 2015, 35(7): 58-73. (in Chinese)