Evaluation of an accelerometer for at-home monitoring of spontaneous activity in dogs

Bernard D. Hansen Comparative Pain Research Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by Bernard D. Hansen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
,
B. Duncan X. Lascelles Comparative Pain Research Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by B. Duncan X. Lascelles in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BVSc, PhD
,
Bruce W. Keene Cardiology Section, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by Bruce W. Keene in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, MS
,
Allison K. Adams Cardiology Section, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by Allison K. Adams in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
, and
Andrea E. Thomson Comparative Pain Research Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27606.

Search for other papers by Andrea E. Thomson in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 BS

Abstract

Objective—To determine the correlation between activity as measured by an accelerometer and videographic measurements of movement and mobility in healthy dogs.

Animals—4 healthy dogs.

Procedures—After determination that accelerometers had good agreement, 5 identical accelerometers were used simultaneously to test their output at 8 locations (rotated among collar, vest, and forelimb stocking locations) on each dog. Movement and mobility for each dog were recorded continuously with a computerized videography system for 7-hour ses-sions on 4 consecutive days. Accelerometer values were combined into 439 fifteen-minute intervals and compared with 3 videographic measurements of movement and mobility (distance traveled, time spent walking > 20 cm/s, and time spent changing position by > 12% of 2-dimensional surface area during 1.5 seconds).

Results—96% of values compared between the most discordant pair of accelerometers were within 2 SDs of the mean value from all 5 accelerometers. All mounting locations provided acceptable correlation with videographic measurements of movement and mobility, and the ventral portion of the collar was determined to be the most convenient location.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Use of an accelerometer was adequate for at-home activity monitoring, an important end point in clinical trials of treatment for chronic disease, and provided information about daily activity that is unattainable by other methods.

Abstract

Objective—To determine the correlation between activity as measured by an accelerometer and videographic measurements of movement and mobility in healthy dogs.

Animals—4 healthy dogs.

Procedures—After determination that accelerometers had good agreement, 5 identical accelerometers were used simultaneously to test their output at 8 locations (rotated among collar, vest, and forelimb stocking locations) on each dog. Movement and mobility for each dog were recorded continuously with a computerized videography system for 7-hour ses-sions on 4 consecutive days. Accelerometer values were combined into 439 fifteen-minute intervals and compared with 3 videographic measurements of movement and mobility (distance traveled, time spent walking > 20 cm/s, and time spent changing position by > 12% of 2-dimensional surface area during 1.5 seconds).

Results—96% of values compared between the most discordant pair of accelerometers were within 2 SDs of the mean value from all 5 accelerometers. All mounting locations provided acceptable correlation with videographic measurements of movement and mobility, and the ventral portion of the collar was determined to be the most convenient location.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Use of an accelerometer was adequate for at-home activity monitoring, an important end point in clinical trials of treatment for chronic disease, and provided information about daily activity that is unattainable by other methods.

  • 1

    Calvert MJ, Freemantle N. Use of health-related quality of life in prescribing research. Part 1: why evaluate health-related quality of life? J Clin Pharm Ther 2003;28:513521.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Jerram RM, Walker AM, Warman CG. Proximal tibial intraarticular ostectomy for treatment of canine cranial cruciate ligament injury. Vet Surg 2005;34:196205.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Peterson KD, Keefe TJ. Effects of meloxicam on severity of lameness and other clinical signs of osteoarthritis in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2004;225:10561060.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Wojciechowska JI, Hewson CJ, Stryhn H, et al. Evaluation of a questionnaire regarding nonphysical aspects of quality of life in sick and healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:14611467.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Walsh JT, Charlesworth A, Andrews R, et al. Relation of daily activity levels in patients with chronic heart failure to long-term prognosis. Am J Cardiol 1997;79:13641369.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Walsh JT, Andrews R, Evans A, et al. Failure of “effective” treatment for heart failure to improve normal customary activity. Br Heart J 1995;74:373376.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Stratford PW, Kennedy DM. Performance measures are necessary to obtain a complete picture of osteoarthritic patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:160167.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol 1997;24:799802.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Wojciechowska JI, Hewson CJ, Stryhn H, et al. Development of a discriminative questionnaire to assess nonphysical aspects of quality of life of dogs. Am J Vet Res 2005;66:14531460.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Borgarelli M, Santilli RA, Chiavegato D, et al. Prognostic indicators for dogs with dilated cardiomyopathy. J Vet Intern Med 2006;20:104110.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Atkins CE, Brown WA, Coats JR, et al. Effects of long-term administration of enalapril on clinical indicators of renal function in dogs with compensated mitral regurgitation (Erratum published in J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:1149). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:654658.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Fuentes VL, Corcoran B, French A, et al. A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of pimobendan in dogs with dilated cardiomyopathy. J Vet Intern Med 2002;16:255261.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Meurs KM, Spier AW, Wright NA, et al. Comparison of the effects of four antiarrhythmic treatments for familial ventricular arrhythmias in Boxers. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:522527.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    The IMPROVE Study Group. Acute and short-term hemodynamic, echocardiographic, and clinical effects of enalapril maleate in dogs with naturally acquired heart failure: results of the Invasive Multicenter PROspective Veterinary Evaluation of Enalapril study. J Vet Intern Med 1995;9:234242.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Freeman LM, Rush JE, Farabaugh AE, et al. Development and evaluation of a questionnaire for assessing health-related quality of life in dogs with cardiac disease. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:18641868.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Kumahara H, Schultz Y, Ayabe M, et al. The use of uniaxial accelerometry for the assessment of physical-activity-related energy expenditure: a validation study against whole-body indirect calorimetry. Br J Nutr 2004;91:235243.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Yokoyama Y, Kawamura T, Tamakoshi A, et al. Comparison of accelerometry and oxymetry for measuring daily physical activity. Circ J 2002;66:751754.

  • 18

    Uiterwaal M, Glerum EB, Busser HJ, et al. Ambulatory monitoring of physical activity in working situations, a validation study. J Med Eng Technol 1998;22:168172.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Walker DJ, Heslop PS, Plummer CJ, et al. A continuous patient activity monitor: validation and relation to disability. Physiol Meas 1997;18:4959.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    van den Berg-Emons HJ, Bussmann JB, Balk AH, et al. Validity of ambulatory accelerometry to quantify physical activity in heart failure. Scand J Rehabil Med 2000;32:187192.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Yamada M, Tokuriki M. Spontaneous activities measured continuously by an accelerometer in beagle dogs housed in a cage. J Vet Med Sci 2000;62:443447.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Chan CB, Spierenburg M, Ihle SL, et al. Use of pedometers to measure physical activity in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2005;226:20102015.

  • 23

    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307310.

  • 24

    Noldus LPJJ, Spink AJ, Tegelenbosch RAJ. Ethovision: a versatile video tracking system for automation of behavioral experiments. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 2001;33:398414.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement