Faculty of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, CanadaCanada.
Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Work. 2020;66(1):201-211. doi: 10.3233/WOR-203164.
The use of wearable accelerometers in conjunction with Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) may provide additional useful information about maximum performance in workers and enhance the validity of functional testing. However, little research has been conducted to compare accelerometer output with performance during FCE.
The objectives of this study were to: (1) Determine the magnitude and direction of correlation between participant performance on five FCE tasks and scores from Actigraph activity monitors; and (2) Compare the results of two different placements of Actigraph devices.
We used a cross-sectional design and convenience sampling to collect data from 46 healthy participants. Each participant completed 5 functional tasks selected from the WorkWell FCE protocol while wearing 2 Actigraph devices, 1 on the dominant side waist and 1 on the non-dominant wrist. The FCE tasks included 5-repetition maximum lifting (floor-to-waist, waist to crown and front carry), a sustained overhead work endurance task, and the 6-minute walk test. Analysis included calculating Pearson regression coefficients between maximum FCE item performance and Actigraph vector magnitudes (VM) along with Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) to compare VM activity counts derived from the Actigraphs on the waist and wrist.
Thirty-Nine (84.8%) participants had complete data and were included in analysis. Findings indicate Actigraph VM data from the device worn on the waist correlated positively with maximum lift performance (r = 0.39-0.64, p < 0.001 to 0.08) and 6-minute walk distance (r = 0.66, p < 0.001). Actigraph data from wrist placement were not significantly correlated with FCE performance on any of the functional tasks, except when comparing average VM data and waist to crown lift (r = 0.44, p < 0.001). There was no significant correlation in either Actigraph placement for VM and overhead work time. ICCs between the two Actigraph placements ranged from poor to acceptable agreement (ICC = 0.24-0.70, p < 0.001 to 0.19).
Actigraph device output correlated moderately with maximum performance on FCE lift and ambulation tests. Waist placement appears more suitable than wrist during performance-based tests.
可穿戴式加速度计与功能能力评估（FCE）的结合使用可能会为工人的最大性能提供额外有用的信息，并提高功能测试的有效性。然而，关于加速度计输出与 FCE 期间的表现之间的比较研究很少。
本研究的目的是：（1）确定参与者在五项 FCE 任务中的表现与 Actigraph 活动监测器得分之间的大小和方向相关性；（2）比较 Actigraph 设备两种不同放置位置的结果。
我们使用横截面设计和便利抽样法从 46 名健康参与者中收集数据。每位参与者在佩戴 2 个 Actigraph 设备的情况下完成了 5 项从 WorkWell FCE 协议中选择的功能任务，1 个设备戴在优势侧腰部，1 个戴在非优势手腕上。FCE 任务包括 5 次重复最大举重（从地板到腰部、腰部到头部和前举）、持续的头顶工作耐力任务和 6 分钟步行测试。分析包括计算最大 FCE 项目表现与 Actigraph 向量幅度（VM）之间的皮尔逊回归系数，以及比较从腰部和手腕佩戴的 Actigraph 得出的 VM 活动计数的组内相关系数（ICC）。
39 名（84.8%）参与者的数据完整，纳入分析。结果表明，佩戴在腰部的 Actigraph VM 数据与最大举重表现呈正相关（r=0.39-0.64，p<0.001 至 0.08）和 6 分钟步行距离（r=0.66，p<0.001）。除了比较平均 VM 数据和腰部到头举时，手腕位置的 Actigraph 数据与 FCE 表现的任何功能任务都没有显著相关性（r=0.44，p<0.001）。两种 Actigraph 放置位置的 VM 和头顶工作时间均无显著相关性。两个 Actigraph 放置位置之间的 ICC 范围从差到可接受的一致性（ICC=0.24-0.70，p<0.001 至 0.19）。
Actigraph 设备的输出与 FCE 举重和步行测试的最大性能中等相关。在基于表现的测试中，腰部放置似乎比手腕更合适。
