Cadence (steps/min) and relative intensity in 61 to 85-year-olds: the CADENCE-Adults study.

BACKGROUND: We previously demonstrated that a heuristic (i.e., evidence-based, rounded yet practical) cadence threshold of ≥ 100 steps/min was associated with absolutely-defined moderate intensity physical activity (i.e., ≥ 3 metabolic equivalents [METs]) in older adults 61-85 years of age. Although it was difficult to ascertain achievement of absolutely-defined vigorous (6 METs) intensity, ≥ 130 steps/min was identified as a defensible threshold for this population. However, little evidence exists regarding cadence thresholds and relatively-defined moderate intensity indicators, including ≥ 64% heart rate [HR] maximum [HRmax = 220-age], ≥ 40% HR reserve [HRR = HRmax-HRresting], and ≥ 12 Borg Scale Rating of Perceived Exertion [RPE]; or vigorous intensity indicators including ≥ 77%HRmax, ≥ 60%HRR, and ≥ 14 RPE. PURPOSE: To analyze the relationship between cadence and relatively-defined physical activity intensity and identify relatively-defined moderate and vigorous heuristic cadence thresholds for older adults 61-85 years of age. METHODS: Ninety-seven ostensibly healthy adults (72.7 ± 6.9 years; 49.5% women) completed up to nine 5-min treadmill walking bouts beginning at 0.5 mph (0.8 km/h) and progressing by 0.5 mph speed increments (with 2-min rest between bouts). Directly-observed (and video-recorded) steps were hand-counted, HR was measured using a chest-strapped monitor, and in the final minute of each bout, participants self-reported RPE. Segmented mixed model regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analyses identified optimal cadence thresholds associated with relatively-defined moderate (≥ 64%HRmax, ≥ 40%HRR, and ≥ 12 RPE) and vigorous (≥ 77%HRmax, ≥ 60%HRR, and ≥ 14 RPE) intensities. A compromise between the two analytical methods, including Youden's Index (a sum of sensitivity and specificity), positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy, yielded final heuristic cadences. RESULTS: Across all relatively-defined moderate intensity indicators, segmented regression models and ROC curve analyses identified optimal cadence thresholds ranging from 105.9 to 112.8 steps/min and 102.0-104.3 steps/min, respectively. Comparable values for vigorous intensity indicators ranged between126.1-132.1 steps/min and 106.7-116.0 steps/min, respectively. Regardless of the relatively-defined intensity indicator, the overall best heuristic cadence threshold aligned with moderate intensity was ≥ 105 steps/min. Vigorous intensity varied between ≥ 115 (greater sensitivity) or ≥ 120 (greater specificity) steps/min. CONCLUSIONS: Heuristic cadence thresholds align with relatively-defined intensity indicators and can be useful for studying and prescribing older adults' physiological response to, and/or perceived experience of, ambulatory physical activity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650258. Registered 24 December 2015.

Cadence-based classification of moderate-intensity overground walking in 41- to 85-year-old adults.

BACKGROUND: Walking cadence (steps/min) has emerged as a valid proxy of physical activity intensity, with consensus across numerous laboratory-based treadmill studies that ≥100 steps/min approximates absolutely defined moderate intensity (≥3 metabolic equivalents; METs). We recently reported that this cadence threshold had a classification accuracy of 73.3% for identifying moderate intensity during preferred pace overground walking in young adults. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the performance of a cadence threshold of ≥100 steps/min for correctly classifying moderate intensity during overground walking in middle- and older-aged adults. METHODS: Participants (N = 174, 48.3% female, 41-85 years of age) completed laboratory-based cross-sectional study involving an indoor 5-min overground walking trial at their preferred pace. Steps were manually counted and converted to cadence (total steps/5 min). Intensity was measured using indirect calorimetry and expressed as METs. Classification accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, accuracy) of a cadence threshold of ≥100 steps/min to identify individuals walking at ≥3 METs was calculated. RESULTS: The ≥100 steps/min threshold demonstrated accuracy of 74.7% for classifying moderate intensity. When comparing middle- vs. older-aged adults, similar accuracy (73.4% vs. 75.8%, respectively) and specificity (33.3% vs. 34.5%) were observed. Sensitivity was high, but was lower for middle- vs. older-aged adults (85.2% vs. 93.9%, respectively). CONCLUSION: A cadence threshold of ≥100 steps/min accurately identified moderate-intensity overground walking. Furthermore, accuracy was similar when comparing middle- and older-aged adults. These findings extend our previous analysis in younger adults and confirm the appropriateness of applying this cadence threshold across the adult lifespan.

A catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies during treadmill walking: the CADENCE-adults study.

BACKGROUND: Standardized validation indices (i.e., accuracy, bias, and precision) provide a comprehensive comparison of step counting wearable technologies. PURPOSE: To expand a previously published child/youth catalog of validity indices to include adults (21-40, 41-60 and 61-85 years of age) assessed across a range of treadmill speeds (slow [0.8-3.2 km/h], normal [4.0-6.4 km/h], fast [7.2-8.0 km/h]) and device wear locations (ankle, thigh, waist, and wrist). METHODS: Two hundred fifty-eight adults (52.5 ± 18.7 years, 49.6% female) participated in this laboratory-based study and performed a series of 5-min treadmill bouts while wearing multiple devices; 21 devices in total were evaluated over the course of this multi-year cross-sectional study (2015-2019). The criterion measure was directly observed steps. Computed validity indices included accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE), bias (mean percentage error, MPE), and precision (correlation coefficient, r; standard deviation, SD; coefficient of variation, CoV). RESULTS: Over the range of normal speeds, 15 devices (Actical, waist-worn ActiGraph GT9X, activPAL, Apple Watch Series 1, Fitbit Ionic, Fitbit One, Fitbit Zip, Garmin vivoactive 3, Garmin vivofit 3, waist-worn GENEActiv, NL-1000, PiezoRx, Samsung Gear Fit2, Samsung Gear Fit2 Pro, and StepWatch) performed at < 5% MAPE. The wrist-worn ActiGraph GT9X displayed the worst accuracy across normal speeds (MAPE = 52%). On average, accuracy was compromised across slow walking speeds for all wearable technologies (MAPE = 40%) while all performed best across normal speeds (MAPE = 7%). When analyzing the data by wear locations, the ankle and thigh demonstrated the best accuracy (both MAPE = 1%), followed by the waist (3%) and the wrist (15%) across normal speeds. There were significant effects of speed, wear location, and age group on accuracy and bias (both p < 0.001) and precision (p ≤ 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized validation indices cataloged by speed, wear location, and age group across the adult lifespan facilitate selecting, evaluating, or comparing performance of step counting wearable technologies. Speed, wear location, and age displayed a significant effect on accuracy, bias, and precision. Overall, reduced performance was associated with very slow walking speeds (0.8 to 3.2 km/h). Ankle- and thigh-located devices logged the highest accuracy, while those located at the wrist reported the worst accuracy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650258. Registered 24 December 2015.

Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 61-85-year-old adults: the CADENCE-Adults study.

BACKGROUND: Heuristic (i.e., evidence-based, rounded) cadences of ≥100 and ≥ 130 steps/min have consistently corresponded with absolutely-defined moderate (3 metabolic equivalents [METs]) and vigorous (6 METs) physical activity intensity, respectively, in adults 21-60 years of age. There is no consensus regarding similar thresholds in older adults. PURPOSE: To provide heuristic cadence thresholds for 3, 4, 5, and 6 METs in 61-85-year-old adults. METHODS: Ninety-eight community-dwelling ambulatory and ostensibly healthy older adults (age = 72.6 ± 6.9 years; 49% women) walked on a treadmill for a series of 5-min bouts (beginning at 0.5 mph with 0.5 mph increments) in this laboratory-based cross-sectional study until: 1) transitioning to running, 2) reaching ≥75% of their age-predicted maximum heart rate, or 3) reporting a Borg rating of perceived exertion > 13. Cadence was directly observed and hand-tallied. Intensity (oxygen uptake [VO2] mL/kg/min) was assessed with indirect calorimetry and converted to METs (1 MET = 3.5 mL/kg/min). Cadence thresholds were identified via segmented mixed effects model regression and using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves. Final heuristic cadence thresholds represented an analytical compromise based on classification accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and overall accuracy). RESULTS: Cadences of 103.1 (95% Prediction Interval: 70.0-114.2), 116.4 (105.3-127.4), 129.6 (118.6-140.7), and 142.9 steps/min (131.8-148.4) were identified for 3, 4, 5, and 6 METs, respectively, based on the segmented regression. Comparable values based on ROC analysis were 100.3 (95% Confidence Intervals: 95.7-103.1), 111.5 (106.1-112.9), 116.0 (112.4-120.2), and 128.6 steps/min (128.3-136.4). Heuristic cadence thresholds of 100, 110, and 120 were associated with 3, 4, and 5 METs. Data to inform a threshold for ≥6 METs was limited, as only 6/98 (6.0%) participants achieved this intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous data collected from 21-40 and 41-60-year-old adults, heuristic cadence thresholds of 100, 110, and 120 steps/min were associated with 3, 4, and 5 METs, respectively, in 61-85-year-old adults. Most older adults tested did not achieve the intensity of ≥6 METs; therefore, our data do not support establishing thresholds corresponding with this intensity level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650258 . Registered 24 December 2015.

A catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies during treadmill walking: the CADENCE-Kids study.

BACKGROUND: Wearable technologies play an important role in measuring physical activity (PA) and promoting health. Standardized validation indices (i.e., accuracy, bias, and precision) compare performance of step counting wearable technologies in young people. PURPOSE: To produce a catalog of validity indices for step counting wearable technologies assessed during different treadmill speeds (slow [0.8-3.2 km/h], normal [4.0-6.4 km/h], fast [7.2-8.0 km/h]), wear locations (waist, wrist/arm, thigh, and ankle), and age groups (children, 6-12 years; adolescents, 13-17 years; young adults, 18-20 years). METHODS: One hundred seventeen individuals (13.1 ± 4.2 years, 50.4% female) participated in this cross-sectional study and completed 5-min treadmill bouts (0.8 km/h to 8.0 km/h) while wearing eight devices (Waist: Actical, ActiGraph GT3X+, NL-1000, SW-200; Wrist: ActiGraph GT3X+; Arm: SenseWear; Thigh: activPAL; Ankle: StepWatch). Directly observed steps served as the criterion measure. Accuracy (mean absolute percentage error, MAPE), bias (mean percentage error, MPE), and precision (correlation coefficient, r; standard deviation, SD; coefficient of variation, CoV) were computed. RESULTS: Five of the eight tested wearable technologies (i.e., Actical, waist-worn ActiGraph GT3X+, activPAL, StepWatch, and SW-200) performed at < 5% MAPE over the range of normal speeds. More generally, waist (MAPE = 4%), thigh (4%) and ankle (5%) locations displayed higher accuracy than the wrist location (23%) at normal speeds. On average, all wearable technologies displayed the lowest accuracy across slow speeds (MAPE = 50.1 ± 35.5%), and the highest accuracy across normal speeds (MAPE = 15.9 ± 21.7%). Speed and wear location had a significant effect on accuracy and bias (P < 0.001), but not on precision (P > 0.05). Age did not have any effect (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Standardized validation indices focused on accuracy, bias, and precision were cataloged by speed, wear location, and age group to serve as important reference points when selecting and/or evaluating device performance in young people moving forward. Reduced performance can be expected at very slow walking speeds (0.8 to 3.2 km/h) for all devices. Ankle-worn and thigh-worn devices demonstrated the highest accuracy. Speed and wear location had a significant effect on accuracy and bias, but not precision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01989104 . Registered November 14, 2013.

Cadence (steps/min) and relative intensity in 21 to 60-year-olds: the CADENCE-adults study.

BACKGROUND: Heuristic cadence (steps/min) thresholds of ≥100 and ≥ 130 steps/min correspond with absolutely-defined moderate (3 metabolic equivalents [METs]; 1 MET = 3.5 mL O2·kg- 1·min- 1) and vigorous (6 METs) intensity, respectively. Scarce evidence informs cadence thresholds for relatively-defined moderate (≥ 64% heart rate maximum [HRmax = 220-age], ≥ 40%HR reserve [HRR = HRmax -HRresting, and ≥ 12 Rating of Perceived Exertion [RPE]); or vigorous intensity (≥ 77%HRmax, ≥ 60%HRR, and ≥ 14 RPE). PURPOSE: To identify heuristic cadence thresholds corresponding with relatively-defined moderate and vigorous intensity in 21-60-year-olds. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 157 adults (40.4 ± 11.5 years; 50.6% men) completed up to twelve 5-min treadmill bouts, beginning at 0.5 mph and increasing by 0.5 mph. Steps were directly observed, HR was measured with chest-worn monitors, and RPE was queried in the final minute of each bout. Segmented mixed model regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analyses identified optimal cadence thresholds, stratified by age (21-30, 31-40, 41-50, and 51-60 years). Reconciliation of the two analytical models, including trade-offs between sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and overall accuracy, yielded final heuristic cadences. RESULTS: Across all moderate intensity indicators, the segmented regression models estimated optimal cadence thresholds ranging from 123.8-127.5 (ages 21-30), 121.3-126.0 (ages 31-40), 117.7-122.7 (ages 41-50), and 113.3-116.1 steps/min (ages 51-60). Corresponding values for vigorous intensity were 140.3-144.1, 140.2-142.6, 139.3-143.6, and 131.6-132.8 steps/min, respectively. ROC analysis estimated chronologically-arranged age groups' cadence thresholds ranging from 114.5-118, 113.5-114.5, 104.6-112.9, and 103.6-106.0 across all moderate intensity indicators, and 127.5, 121.5, 117.2-123.2, and 113.0 steps/min, respectively, for vigorous intensity. CONCLUSIONS: Heuristic cadence thresholds corresponding to relatively-defined moderate intensity for the chronologically-arranged age groups were ≥ 120, 120, 115, and 105 steps/min, regardless of the intensity indicator (i.e., % HRmax, %HRR, or RPE). Corresponding heuristic values for vigorous intensity indicators were ≥ 135, 130, 125, and 120 steps/min. These cadences are useful for predicting/programming intensity aligned with age-associated differences in physiological response to, and perceived experiences of, moderate and/or vigorous intensity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02650258 . Registered 24 December 2015.

Walking cadence (steps/min) and intensity in 41 to 60-year-old adults: the CADENCE-adults study.

BACKGROUND: In younger adults (i.e., those < 40 years of age) a walking cadence of 100 steps/min is a consistently supported threshold indicative of absolutely-defined moderate intensity ambulation (i.e., ≥ 3 metabolic equivalents; METs). Less is known about the cadence-intensity relationship in adults of middle-age. PURPOSE: To establish heuristic (i.e., evidence-based, practical, rounded) cadence thresholds for absolutely-defined moderate (3 METs) and vigorous (6 METs) intensity in adults 41 to 60 years of age. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 80 healthy adults of middle-age (10 men and 10 women representing each 5-year age-group between 41 to 60 years; body mass index = 26.0 ± 4.0 kg/m2) walked on a treadmill for 5-min bouts beginning at 0.5 mph and increasing in 0.5 mph increments. Performance termination criteria included: 1) transitioning to running, 2) reaching 75% of age-predicted maximum heart rate, or 3) reporting a Borg rating of perceived exertion > 13. Cadence was directly observed (i.e., hand tallied). Intensity (i.e., oxygen uptake [VO2] mL/kg/min) was assessed with an indirect calorimeter and converted to METs (1 MET = 3.5 mL/kg/min). A combination of segmented regression and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) modeling approaches was used to identify optimal cadence thresholds. Final heuristic thresholds were determined based on an evaluation of classification accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, overall accuracy). RESULTS: The regression model identified 101.7 (95% Predictive Interval [PI]: 54.9-110.6) and 132.1 (95% PI: 122.0-142.2) steps/min as optimal cadence thresholds for 3 METs and 6 METs, respectively. Corresponding values based on ROC models were 98.5 (95% Confidence Intervals [CI]: 97.1-104.9) and 117.3 (95% CI: 113.1-126.1) steps/min. Considering both modeling approaches, the selected heuristic thresholds for moderate and vigorous intensity were 100 and 130 steps/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with our previous report in 21 to 40-year-old adults, cadence thresholds of 100 and 130 steps/min emerged as heuristic values associated with 3 and 6 METs, respectively, in 41 to 60-year-old adults. These values were selected based on their utility for public health messaging and on the trade-offs in classification accuracy parameters from both statistical methods. Findings will need to be confirmed in older adults and in free-living settings.

Cadence-based Classification of Minimally Moderate Intensity During Overground Walking in 21- to 40-Year-Old Adults.

BACKGROUND: A walking cadence of ≥100 steps/min corresponds to minimally moderate intensity, absolutely defined as ≥3 metabolic equivalents (METs). This threshold has primarily been calibrated during treadmill walking. There is a need to determine the classification accuracy of this cadence threshold to predict intensity during overground walking. METHODS: In this laboratory-based cross-sectional investigation, participants (N = 75, 49.3% women, age 21-40 y) performed a single 5-minute overground (hallway) walking trial at a self-selected preferred pace. Steps accumulated during each trial were hand tallied and converted to cadence (steps/min). Oxygen uptake was measured using indirect calorimetry and converted to METs. The classification accuracy (sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, and positive predictive value) of ≥100 steps/min to predict ≥3 METs was calculated. RESULTS: A cadence threshold of ≥100 steps/min yielded an overall accuracy (combined sensitivity and specificity) of 73.3% for predicting minimally moderate intensity. Moreover, for individuals walking at a cadence ≥100 steps/min, the probability (positive predictive value) of achieving minimally moderate intensity was 80.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Although primarily developed using treadmill-based protocols, a cadence threshold of ≥100 steps/min for young adults appears to be a valid heuristic value (evidence-based, rounded, practical) associated with minimally moderate intensity during overground walking performed at a self-selected preferred pace.

Using Music-Based Cadence Entrainment to Manipulate Walking Intensity.

BACKGROUND: While previous studies indicate an auditory metronome can entrain cadence (in steps per minute), music may also evoke prescribed cadences and metabolic intensities. PURPOSE: To determine how modulating the tempo of a single commercial song influences adults' ability to entrain foot strikes while walking and how this entrainment affects metabolic intensity. METHODS: Twenty healthy adults (10 men and 10 women; mean [SD]: age 23.7 [2.7] y, height 172.8 [9.0] cm, mass 71.5 [16.2] kg) walked overground on a large circular pathway for six 5-min conditions; 3 self-selected speeds (slow, normal, and fast); and 3 trials listening to a song with its tempo modulated to 80, 100, and 125 beats per minute. During music trials, participants were instructed to synchronize their step timing with the music tempo. Cadence was measured via direct observation, and metabolic intensity (metabolic equivalents) was assessed using indirect calorimetry. RESULTS: Participants entrained their cadences to the music tempos (mean absolute percentage error = 5.3% [5.8%]). Entraining to a music tempo of 100 beats per minute yielded ≥3 metabolic equivalents in 90% of participants. Trials with music entrainment exhibited greater metabolic intensity compared with self-paced trials (repeated-measures analysis of variance, F1,19 = 8.05, P = .01). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the potential for using music to evoke predictable metabolic intensities.