Integrity and Performance of Four Tape Solutions for Mounting Accelerometry Devices: Lolland-Falster Health Study

Therese Lockenwitz Petersen, J. Brønd, E. Benfeldt, R. Jepsen
{"title":"Integrity and Performance of Four Tape Solutions for Mounting Accelerometry Devices: Lolland-Falster Health Study","authors":"Therese Lockenwitz Petersen, J. Brønd, E. Benfeldt, R. Jepsen","doi":"10.1123/jmpb.2022-0024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Tape-mounted Axivity AX3 accelerometers are increasingly being used to monitor physical activity of individuals, but studies on the integrity and performance of diffe1rent attachment protocols are missing. Purpose: The purpose of this paper was to evaluate four attachment protocols with respect to skin reactions, adhesion, and wear time in children and adults using tape-mounted Axivity AX3 accelerometers and to evaluate the associated ease of handling. Methods: We used data from the Danish household-based population study, the Lolland-Falster Health Study. Participants were instructed to wear accelerometers for seven consecutive days and to complete a questionnaire on skin reactions and issues relating to adhesion. A one-way analysis of variance was used to examine differences in skin reactions and adhesion between the protocols. A Tukey post hoc test compared group means. Ease of handling was assessed throughout the data collection. Results: In total, 5,389 individuals were included (1,289 children and 4,100 adults). For both children and adults, skin reactions were most frequent in Protocols 1 and 2. Adhesion problems were most frequent in Protocol 3. Wear time was longest in Protocol 4. Skin reactions and adhesion problems were more frequent in children compared to adults. Adults achieved longest wear time. Discussion: Covering the skin completely with adhesive tape seemed to cause skin reactions. Too short pieces of fixation tape caused accelerometers to fall off. Protocols necessitating removal of remains of glue on the accelerometers required a lot of work. Conclusion: The last of the four protocols was superior in respect to skin reactions, adhesion, wear time, and ease of handling.","PeriodicalId":73572,"journal":{"name":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal for the measurement of physical behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/jmpb.2022-0024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Background: Tape-mounted Axivity AX3 accelerometers are increasingly being used to monitor physical activity of individuals, but studies on the integrity and performance of diffe1rent attachment protocols are missing. Purpose: The purpose of this paper was to evaluate four attachment protocols with respect to skin reactions, adhesion, and wear time in children and adults using tape-mounted Axivity AX3 accelerometers and to evaluate the associated ease of handling. Methods: We used data from the Danish household-based population study, the Lolland-Falster Health Study. Participants were instructed to wear accelerometers for seven consecutive days and to complete a questionnaire on skin reactions and issues relating to adhesion. A one-way analysis of variance was used to examine differences in skin reactions and adhesion between the protocols. A Tukey post hoc test compared group means. Ease of handling was assessed throughout the data collection. Results: In total, 5,389 individuals were included (1,289 children and 4,100 adults). For both children and adults, skin reactions were most frequent in Protocols 1 and 2. Adhesion problems were most frequent in Protocol 3. Wear time was longest in Protocol 4. Skin reactions and adhesion problems were more frequent in children compared to adults. Adults achieved longest wear time. Discussion: Covering the skin completely with adhesive tape seemed to cause skin reactions. Too short pieces of fixation tape caused accelerometers to fall off. Protocols necessitating removal of remains of glue on the accelerometers required a lot of work. Conclusion: The last of the four protocols was superior in respect to skin reactions, adhesion, wear time, and ease of handling.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
四种磁带解决方案的完整性和性能安装加速度计设备:Lolland-Falster健康研究
背景:磁带安装的Axivity AX3加速度计越来越多地用于监测个人的身体活动,但缺乏对不同依恋协议的完整性和性能的研究。目的:本文的目的是使用胶带安装的Axivity AX3加速度计评估儿童和成人在皮肤反应、粘附和磨损时间方面的四种附着方案,并评估相关的操作方便性。方法:我们使用的数据来自丹麦以家庭为基础的人口研究,Lolland-Falster健康研究。参与者被要求连续7天佩戴加速度计,并完成一份关于皮肤反应和粘连问题的问卷。使用单向方差分析来检查不同方案之间皮肤反应和粘附的差异。Tukey事后检验比较各组均值。在整个数据收集过程中评估了处理的便利性。结果:总共包括5389人(1289名儿童和4100名成人)。对于儿童和成人,皮肤反应在方案1和方案2中最常见。粘附问题在议定书3中最为常见。议定书4的磨损时间最长。与成人相比,儿童的皮肤反应和粘连问题更常见。成年人的穿着时间最长。讨论:用胶带完全覆盖皮肤似乎会引起皮肤反应。固定胶带太短导致加速度计脱落。需要去除加速度计上残留的胶水的方案需要大量的工作。结论:四种方案中最后一种方案在皮肤反应、粘附性、磨损时间和操作方便性方面均优于其他方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Influence of Accelerometer Calibration on the Estimation of Objectively Measured Physical Activity: The Tromsø Study Criterion Validity of Accelerometers in Determining Knee-Flexion Angles During Sitting in a Laboratory Setting Comparability of 24-hr Activity Cycle Outputs From ActiGraph Counts Generated in ActiLife and RStudio Comparison of Sleep and Physical Activity Metrics From Wrist-Worn ActiGraph wGT3X-BT and GT9X Accelerometers During Free-Living in Adults Pre- Versus Postmeal Sedentary Duration—Impact on Postprandial Glucose in Older Adults With Overweight or Obesity
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1