Introduction The Prospective Physical Activity Sitting and Sleep consortium (ProPASS) is an international collaboration platform committed to harmonise thigh-worn accelerometry data. The aim of this paper is to (1) outline observational thigh-worn accelerometry studies and (2) summarise key strategic directions arising from the inaugural ProPASS meeting. Methods (1) We performed a systematic scoping review for observational studies of thigh-worn triaxial accelerometers in free-living adults (n≥100, 24 hours monitoring protocols). (2)Attendees of the inaugural ProPASS meeting were sent a survey focused on areas related to developing ProPASS: important terminology (Q1); accelerometry constructs (Q2); advantages and distinct contribution of the consortium (Q3); data pooling and harmonisation (Q4); data access and sharing (Q5 and Q6). Results (1) Eighty eligible articles were identified (22 primary studies; n~17 685). The accelerometers used most often were the ActivPAL3 and ActiGraph GT3X. The most commonly collected health outcomes were cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal. (2) None of the survey questions elicited the predefined 60% agreement. Survey responses recommended that ProPASS: use the term physical behaviour or movement behaviour rather than ‘physical activity’ for the data we are collecting (Q1); make only minor changes to ProPASS’s accelerometry construct (Q2); prioritise developing standardised protocols/tools (Q4); facilitate flexible methods of data sharing and access (Q5 and Q6). Conclusions Thigh-worn accelerometry is an emerging method of capturing movement and posture across the 24 hours cycle. In 2020, the literature is limited to 22 primary studies from high-income western countries. This work identified ProPASS’s strategic directions—indicating areas where ProPASS can most benefit the field of research: use of clear terminology, refinement of the measured construct, standardised protocols/tools and flexible data sharing.

Galileo Galilei’s quote ‘ measure what is measurable, and make measurable what is not so ’ has particular relevance to health behaviours, such as physical activity (PA), sitting and sleep, whose measurement during free living is notoriously difficult. To date, much of what we know about how these behaviours affect our health is based on self-report by questionnaires which have limited validity, are prone to bias and inquire about selective aspects of these behaviours. Although self-reported evidence has made great contributions to shaping public health and exercise medicine policy and guidelines until now,1 the ongoing advancements of accelerometry-based measurement and evidence synthesis methods are set to change the landscape. The aim of this editorial is to outline new directions in PA and sleep-related epidemiology that open new horizons for guideline development and improvement; and to describe a new research collaboration platform: the Prospective Physical Activity, Sitting, and Sleep consortium (ProPASS) (figure 1). Figure 1 Measurement technology used in epidemiology has made measurable what was not so until recently. Several population-based studies use accelerometers that are worn by participants for 24 hours a day for a whole week, offering unprecedented insights into the health attributes of PA, sitting and sleep. One of the most exciting aspects of accelerometers is that they show great promise for capturing nearly complete accounts of movement behaviour, including posture and activity type detection.2 However, advanced measurement methods and optimal evidence synthesis are not synonymous. Individual …

A common way to conduct practical risk assessments is to observe a job and report the observed long term risks for musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter- and intra-observer reliability of ergonomists' risk assessments without the support of an explicit risk assessment method. Twenty-one experienced ergonomists assessed the risk level (low, moderate, high risk) of eight upper body regions, as well as the global risk of 10 video recorded work tasks. Intra-observer reliability was assessed by having nine of the ergonomists repeat the procedure at least three weeks after the first assessment. The ergonomists made their risk assessment based on his/her experience and knowledge. The statistical parameters of reliability included agreement in %, kappa, linearly weighted kappa, intraclass correlation and Kendall's coefficient of concordance. The average inter-observer agreement of the global risk was 53% and the corresponding weighted kappa (Kw) was 0.32, indicating fair reliability. The intra-observer agreement was 61% and 0.41 (Kw). This study indicates that risk assessments of the upper body, without the use of an explicit observational method, have non-acceptable reliability. It is therefore recommended to use systematic risk assessment methods to a higher degree.

Body postural allocation during daily life is important for health, and can be assessed with thigh-worn accelerometers. An algorithm based on sedentary bouts from the proprietary ActivePAL software can detect lying down from a single thigh-worn accelerometer using rotations of the thigh. However, it is not usable across brands of accelerometers. This algorithm has the potential to be refined. Aim: To refine and assess the validity of an algorithm to detect lying down from raw data of thigh-worn accelerometers. Axivity-AX3 accelerometers were placed on the thigh and upper back (reference) on adults in a development dataset (n = 50) and a validation dataset (n = 47) for 7 days. Sedentary time from the open Acti4-algorithm was used as input to the algorithm. In addition to the thigh-rotation criterion in the existing algorithm, two criteria based on standard deviation of acceleration and a time duration criterion of sedentary bouts were added. The mean difference (95% agreement-limits) between the total identified lying time/day, between the refined algorithm and the reference was +2.9 (−135,141) min in the development dataset and +6.5 (−145,159) min in the validation dataset. The refined algorithm can be used to estimate lying time in studies using different accelerometer brands.

Summary: Accelerometers placed on the thigh provide accurate measures of daily physical activity types, postures and sedentary behaviours, over 24 h and across consecutive days. However, the ability to estimate sleep duration or quality from thigh‐worn accelerometers is uncertain and has not been evaluated in comparison with the ‘gold‐standard’ measurement of sleep polysomnography. This study aimed to develop an algorithm for sleep estimation using the raw data from a thigh‐worn accelerometer and to evaluate it in comparison with polysomnography. The algorithm was developed and optimised on a dataset consisting of 23 single‐night polysomnography recordings, collected in a laboratory, from 15 asymptomatic adults. This optimised algorithm was then applied to a separate evaluation dataset, in which, 71 adult males (mean [SD] age 57 [11] years, height 181 [6] cm, weight 82 [13] kg) wore ambulatory polysomnography equipment and a thigh‐worn accelerometer, simultaneously, whilst sleeping at home. Compared with polysomnography, the algorithm had a sensitivity of 0.84 and a specificity of 0.55 when estimating sleep periods. Sleep intervals were underestimated by 21 min (130 min, Limits of Agreement Range [LoAR]). Total sleep time was underestimated by 32 min (233 min LoAR). Our results evaluate the performance of a new algorithm for estimating sleep and outline the limitations. Based on these results, we conclude that a single device can provide estimates of the sleep interval and total sleep time with sufficient accuracy for the measurement of daily physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and sleep, on a group level in free‐living settings.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP)–lowering effects of structured exercise are well-established. Effects of 24-hour movement behaviors captured in free-living settings have received less attention. This cross-sectional study investigated associations between a 24-hour behavior composition comprising 6 parts (sleeping, sedentary behavior, standing, slow walking, fast walking, and combined exercise-like activity [eg, running and cycling]) and systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP). METHODS: Data from thigh-worn accelerometers and BP measurements were collected from 6 cohorts in the Prospective Physical Activity, Sitting and Sleep consortium (ProPASS) (n=14 761; mean±SD, 54.2±9.6 years). Individual participant analysis using compositional data analysis was conducted with adjustments for relevant harmonized covariates. Based on the average sample composition, reallocation plots examined estimated BP reductions through behavioral replacement; the theoretical benefits of optimal (ie, clinically meaningful improvement in SBP [2 mm Hg] or DBP [1 mm Hg]) and minimal (ie, 5-minute reallocation) behavioral replacements were identified. RESULTS: The average 24-hour composition consisted of sleeping (7.13±1.19 hours), sedentary behavior (10.7±1.9 hours), standing (3.2±1.1 hours), slow walking (1.6±0.6 hours), fast walking (1.1±0.5 hours), and exercise-like activity (16.0±16.3 minutes). More time spent exercising or sleeping, relative to other behaviors, was associated with lower BP. An additional 5 minutes of exercise-like activity was associated with estimated reductions of –0.68 mm Hg (95% CI, –0.15, –1.21) SBP and –0.54 mm Hg (95% CI, –0.19, 0.89) DBP. Clinically meaningful improvements in SBP and DBP were estimated after 20 to 27 minutes and 10 to 15 minutes of reallocation of time in other behaviors into additional exercise. Although more time spent being sedentary was adversely associated with SBP and DBP, there was minimal impact of standing or walking. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings reiterate the importance of exercise for BP control, suggesting that small additional amounts of exercise are associated with lower BP in a free-living setting.