Patient-focused endpoints in advanced cancer: Criterion-based validation of accelerometer-based activity monitoring.

Summary: Background & aims: Objective assessment of daily physical activity (PA) by body-worn accelerometers offers potential as a novel endpoint in the clinical management of advanced cancer patients. This study aimed to assess criterion-based validity of an accelerometer-based activity monitoring...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical Nutrition Vol. 30; no. 6; pp. 812 - 822
Main Authors: Skipworth, Richard J.E., Stene, Guro B., Dahele, Max, Hendry, Paul O., Small, Alexandra C., Blum, David, Kaasa, Stein, Trottenberg, Peter, Radbruch, Lukas, Strasser, Florian, Preston, Tom, Fearon, Kenneth C.H., Helbostad, Jorunn L.
Format: equations & formulas research tables/charts Journal Article
Published: Elsevier B.V. Dec2011
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=104606226&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 104606226
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        02615614
        8IC
      jtl: Clinical Nutrition
      issn: 02615614
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2011
      vid: 30
      iid: 6
      pid: 467
      pub: Elsevier B.V.
      place: New York, New York
    artinfo:
      ui:
        104606226
        67548050
        10.1016/j.clnu.2011.05.010
        NLM21733604
        104606226
      ppf: 812
      ppct: 10
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Patient-focused endpoints in advanced cancer: Criterion-based validation of accelerometer-based activity monitoring.
      aug:
        au:
          Skipworth, Richard J.E.
          Stene, Guro B.
          Dahele, Max
          Hendry, Paul O.
          Small, Alexandra C.
          Blum, David
          Kaasa, Stein
          Trottenberg, Peter
          Radbruch, Lukas
          Strasser, Florian
          Preston, Tom
          Fearon, Kenneth C.H.
          Helbostad, Jorunn L.
        affil: Clinical and Surgical Sciences (Surgery), University of Edinburgh, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, 51 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh EH16 4SA, United Kingdom
      sug:
        subj:
          Physical Activity Evaluation
          Accelerometry
          Energy Metabolism Evaluation
          Human
          Validation Studies
          Inpatients
          Outpatients
          Norway
          Germany
          Switzerland
          Doubly Labeled Water Technique
          Data Collection Methods
          Accelerometers
          Videorecording
          Calorimetry
          Data Analysis Software
          T-Tests
          Pearson's Correlation Coefficient
          Post Hoc Analysis
          Adult
          Middle Age
          Aged
          Aged, 80 and Over
          Female
          Male
          P-Value
          Regression
          Adipose Tissue
          Funding Source
          Karnofsky Performance Status
          Clinical Assessment Tools
          Scales
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Aged: 65+ years
          Aged, 80 & over
          Female
          Male
      ab: Summary: Background & aims: Objective assessment of daily physical activity (PA) by body-worn accelerometers offers potential as a novel endpoint in the clinical management of advanced cancer patients. This study aimed to assess criterion-based validity of an accelerometer-based activity monitoring system (AM-system), ActivPAL™, using two different methods. Methods: Advanced cancer in patients and outpatients (Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) 40–100). ActivPAL™ measurements were validated against (i) observations and (ii) energy expenditure (EE) measured by 2-week doubly-labelled water (DLW) protocol. Results: Absolute errors for mean time spent in different body positions (<0.1%) and number of transfers (0%) were low. Step count error was significantly higher in patients with KPS 40–60 (non-self caring) compared to KPS 70–100 (self-caring) (33 vs. 24%, p = 0.006). Post-hoc mathematical analysis demonstrated that absolute errors for the mean energy expenditure of activity (EEA) (1.4%) and mean total EE (0.4%) were low, but agreement was also low. Conclusions: AM-systems provide valid estimates of body positions and transfers, but not step count, especially in non-self caring patients. ActivPAL™ can derive estimates of EE but there is considerable variability in results, which is consistent, in part, with the inaccuracy in step count. Further studies are required to assess the validity of different endpoints derived from AM-systems in advanced cancer patients.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        equations & formulas
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N