Acceptability of novel lifelogging technology to determine context of sedentary behaviour in older adults

Juliet A Harvey; Dawn A Skelton; Sebastien F M Chastin; Juliet A Harvey; Dawn A Skelton; Sebastien F M Chastin

doi:10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.158

AIMS Public Health

2016, Volume 3, Issue 1: 158-171. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.158

Previous Article Next Article

Brief report Special Issues

Acceptability of novel lifelogging technology to determine context of sedentary behaviour in older adults

Glasgow Caledonian University, School of Health and Life Sciences, Institute of Allied Health Research, Glasgow, UK

Received: 30 November 2015 Accepted: 23 March 2016 Published: 24 March 2016

Objective: Lifelogging, using body worn sensors (activity monitors and time lapse photography) has the potential to shed light on the context of sedentary behaviour. The objectives of this study were to examine the acceptability, to older adults, of using lifelogging technology and indicate its usefulness for understanding behaviour. Method: 6 older adults (4 males, mean age: 68yrs) wore the equipment (ActivPAL^TM and Vicon Revue^TM/SenseCam^TM) for 7 consecutive days during free-living activity. The older adults’ perception of the lifelogging technology was assessed through semi-structured interviews, including a brief questionnaire (Likert scale), and reference to the researcher's diary. Results: Older adults in this study found the equipment acceptable to wear and it did not interfere with privacy, safety or create reactivity, but they reported problems with the actual technical functioning of the camera. Conclusion: This combination of sensors has good potential to provide lifelogging information on the context of sedentary behaviour.
- Sedentary,
- Lifelogging,
- Objective Monitoring,
- Older Adults
Citation: Juliet A Harvey, Dawn A Skelton, Sebastien F M Chastin. Acceptability of novel lifelogging technology to determine context of sedentary behaviour in older adults[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2016, 3(1): 158-171. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.158

Related Papers:

Abstract

Objective: Lifelogging, using body worn sensors (activity monitors and time lapse photography) has the potential to shed light on the context of sedentary behaviour. The objectives of this study were to examine the acceptability, to older adults, of using lifelogging technology and indicate its usefulness for understanding behaviour. Method: 6 older adults (4 males, mean age: 68yrs) wore the equipment (ActivPAL^TM and Vicon Revue^TM/SenseCam^TM) for 7 consecutive days during free-living activity. The older adults’ perception of the lifelogging technology was assessed through semi-structured interviews, including a brief questionnaire (Likert scale), and reference to the researcher's diary. Results: Older adults in this study found the equipment acceptable to wear and it did not interfere with privacy, safety or create reactivity, but they reported problems with the actual technical functioning of the camera. Conclusion: This combination of sensors has good potential to provide lifelogging information on the context of sedentary behaviour.

References

[1]	Sedentary Behaviour Research Network (2012) Letter to the Editor: Standardized use of the term “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviour”. Appl Physio Nut Med 37: 540-542. doi: 10.1139/h2012-024
[2]	Katzmarzyk PT (2010) Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Health: Paradigm Paralysis or Paradigm Shift? Diabetes 59 (11): 2717-2725.
[3]	Dogra S, Stathokostas L (2012) Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity Are Independent Predictors of Successful Aging in Middle Aged and Older Adults. J Aging Res Article ID 190654, doi: 10.1155/2012/190654.
[4]	Hallal PC, Andersen LB, Bull FC, et al. (2012) Global Physical Activity Levels: surveillance, progress, pitfalls and prospects. Lancet 380: 247-257. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60646-1
[5]	World Health Organisation. Geneva: Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health (2010) Available from: http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/factsheet_recommendations/en/
[6]	Department of Health. London: Start Active, Stay Active: A report on physical activity from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers, Department of Health Physical Activity Team; (2011) Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/start-active-stay-active-a-report-on-physical-activity-from-the-four-home-countries-chief-medical-officers
[7]	Matthews CE, Chen KY, Freedson PS, et al. (2008) Amount of time spent in sedentary behaviors in the United States, 2003-2004. Am J Epidemiol 167 (7): 875-81.
[8]	Haskell W, Blair SN, Hill JO (2009) Physical activity: Health outcomes and importance of public health priority. Prev Med 49: 280-282. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.05.002
[9]	Heath GW, Parra DC, Sarmiento OL, et al. (2012) Evidence-based intervention in physical activity: lessons from around the world. Lancet 380: 272-281.
[10]	Owen N, Leslie E, Salmon J et al. (2000) Environmental Determinants of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior. Exerc Sport Sci Rev 28 (4): 153-158.
[11]	Bauman AE, Reis RS, Sallis JF, et al. (2012) Correlates of physical activity: why are some people physically active and others not? Lancet 380: 258-271. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60735-1
[12]	Wandke H, Sengpiel M, Sönksen M (2012) Myths About Older People’s Use of Information and Communication Technology. Gerontology 56 (6): 564-566.
[13]	Harvey JA, Chastin SFM, Skelton (2015) How sedentary are older people? A systematic review of the amount of sedentary behaviour. J Aging Phys Act 23 (3): 471-487.
[14]	Gardiner PA, Eakin EG, Healy GN, et al. (2011) Feasibility of Reducing Older Adults’ Sedentary Time. Am J Prev Med 41 (2): 174-177.
[15]	Swan M (2009) Emerging patient-driven health care models: an examination of health social networks, consumer personalized medicine and quantified self-tracking. Int J Environ Res Public Health 6 (2): 492-525.
[16]	Doherty AR, Hodge SE, King AC, et al. (2013) Wearable Cameras in Health: The State of the Art and Future Possibilities. Am J Prev Med 44 (3): 320-323.
[17]	Hodge S, William L, Berry E, et al. (2006) SenseCam: A retrospective memory aid. Lect Notes Computer Serv 4206: 177-193. doi: 10.1007/11853565_11
[18]	Brown G, Berry E, Kapur N, et al. (2011) SenseCam improves memory for recent events and quality of life in patients with memory retrieval difficulties. Memory 19 (7): 713-22.
[19]	Nguyen DH, Marcu G, Hayes GR, et al. (2009) Encountering SenseCam: Personal Recording Technologies in Everyday Life, Ubicomp '09 Proceedings of the 11th international conference on ubiquitous computing, Florida, USA 165-174.
[20]	Smeaton AF, Lanagan J, Caulfield B, et al. (2012) Combined wearable sensors for location-free monitoring of gait in older people. J Ambient Intell Smart Environ 4: 335-346.
[21]	Wilson G, Martin D, Jones D, et al. (2012) Exploring everyday activity and function in older adults with chronic pain: New insights with new technology. J Aging Phys Act 20: S295.
[22]	Leask CF, Harvey JA, Skelton DA, et al. (2015) The context of sedentary behaviour in older adults (what, where, why, when and with whom). Eur Rev Aging Phys Act 12:4. doi: 10.1186/s11556-015-0146-7
[23]	Doherty AR, Kelly P, Kerr J, et al. (2013) Use of wearable cameras to assess population physical activity behaviours: an observational study. Lancet 380 (supplement 3): S35.
[24]	Kerr J, Marshall SJ, Godbole S, et al. (2013) Using the SenseCam to Improve Classification of Sedentary Behavior in Free-Living Settings. Am J Prev Med 44 (3): 290-296.
[25]	Grant PM, Ryan CG, Tigbe WW, et al. (2006) The validation of a novel activity monitor in the measurement of posture and motion during everyday activities. Br J Sports Med 40: 992-997.
[26]	Godfrey A, Culhane KM, Lyons GM (2007) Comparison of the performance of the ActivPAL professional physical activity logger to a discreet accelerometer-based activity monitor. Med Eng Phys 29: 930-4. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2006.10.001
[27]	Chastin SFM, Granat MH (2010) Methods for objective measure, quantification and analysis of sedentary behaviour and inactivity. Gait Posture 31: 82-86 doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.09.002
[28]	Grant PM, Dall PM, Mitchell SL, et al. (2008) Activity-monitoring accuracy in measuring step number and cadence in community-dwelling older adults. J Phys Act 16 (2): 201-214.
[29]	Lord S, Chastin SFM, McInnes L, et al. (2011) Exploring patterns of daily physical and sedentary behaviour in community-dwelling older adults, Age Aging 40 (2): 205-210.
[30]	Kelly P, Doherty A, Berry E, et al. (2011) Can we use digital life-long images to investigate active and sedentary travel behaviour? Results for a pilot study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 8: 44 1-9.
[31]	Lahlou S (2011) How can we capture the subject perspective? An evidence based approach to social science. Soc Sci Inf 50 (3-4): 607-655.
[32]	Matthews CE, Hagströmer M, Pober DM et al. (2012) Best Practices for using physical activity monitors in population-based reseach.Med Sci Sport Exer 44: S68-S76. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182399e5b
[33]	Doherty AR, Moulin CJA, Smeaton AF (2011)Automatically Assisting Human Memory: A SenseCam Browser. Memory 19 (7): 785-795
[34]	Kelly P, Marshall SJ, Badland H et al. (2013) An Ethical Framework for Automated, Wearable Cameras in Health Behavior Research. Am J Prev Med 44 (3): 314-319.

Reader Comments

your name:*

Email:*
© 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)