Validation of the RT3 triaxial accelerometer for the assessment of physical activity
Validation of the RT3 triaxial accelerometer for the assessment of physical activity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1249/01.mss.0000117158.14542.e7
复制
发表时间：
2004-03-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Topping, R
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rowlands, AV;Thomas, PWM;Topping, R
目的：本研究的目的是评估和比较RT 3加速度计用于评估男孩和男性身体活动的有效性，比较RT 3和Tritrac加速度计计数，并确定中度（大于或等于3 < 6 MET）和剧烈（大于或等于6 MET）活动的计数截止值。研究方法：19名男孩（年龄：9.5 +/- 0.8岁）和15名男性（年龄：20.7 +/- 1.4岁）在跑步机上行走和跑步，来回踢球，玩跳房子，安静地坐着。RT 3戴在右臀部;男孩也戴在左臀部的Tritrac。耗氧量表示为体重的0.75次方（S（V）除以O-2）。结果：RT 3计数与S（V）over dotO-2在男孩（r = 0.87，P < 0.01）和男性（r = 0.85，P < 0.01）中均呈显著正相关。然而，在跑步机活动中，男孩的RT 3计数显著较高（P < 0.05）。在所有活动中，男孩和男性对应于“中度”和“剧烈”活动的RT 3计数相似（男孩中度= 970.2，男性984.0，男性剧烈= 2333.0，男性2340.8），但仅考虑跑步机活动时，男性的RT 3计数低约400。在男孩中，Tritrac计数与S（V）在点O-2上显著相关（r = 0.87，P < 0.01），但在大多数活动中，Tritrac计数显著低于RT 3计数（P < 0.05）。结论：RT 3加速度计是一个很好的测量男孩和男人的身体活动。然而，中等强度和剧烈强度计数阈值不同的男孩和男子时，主要活动是步行和跑步。对于许多活性，RT 3计数显著高于Tritrac计数。这些发现在比较使用不同工具的研究之间的活动计数时具有意义。
Purpose: The aims of this study were to assess and compare the validity of the RT3 accelerometer for the assessment of physical activity in boys and men, to compare RT3 and Tritrac accelerometer counts, and to determine count cut-off values for moderate (greater than or equal to3 < 6 METs) and vigorous (greater than or equal to6 METs) activity. Methods: Nineteen boys (age: 9.5 +/- 0.8 yr) and 15 men (age: 20.7 +/- 1.4 yr) walked and ran on a treadmill, kicked a ball to and fro, played hopscotch, and sat quietly. An RT3 was worn on the right hip; boys also wore a Tritrac on the left hip. Oxygen consumption was expressed as a ratio of body mass raised to the power of 0.75 (S(V) over dot O-2). Results: RT3 counts correlated significantly with S(V) over dot O-2 in boys (r = 0.87, P < 0.01) and men (r = 0.85, P < 0.01). However, during treadmill activities, RT3 counts were significantly higher for boys (P < 0.05). RT3 counts corresponding to "moderate" and "vigorous" activity were similar for boys and men for all activities (moderate = 970.2 for boys and 984.0 for men-, vigorous = 2333.0 for boys and 2340.8 for men) but approximately 400 counts lower in men when only treadmill activities were considered. Tritrac counts correlated significantly with S(V) over dot O-2 in boys (r = 0.87, P < 0.01), but were significantly lower than RT3 counts across most activities (P < 0.05). Conclusions: The RT3 accelerometer is a good measure of physical activity for boys and men. However, moderate and vigorous intensity count thresholds differ for boys and men when the predominant activities are walking and running. RT3 counts are significantly higher than Tritrac counts for a number of activities. These findings have implications when comparing activity counts between studies using the different instruments.