4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Locomotive and non-locomotive activities evaluated with a triaxial accelerometer in adults and elderly individuals

期刊

AGING CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 25, 期 6, 页码 637-643

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40520-013-0163-1

关键词

Physical activity; Aging; Gender; Japanese

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Aims Comparative data on locomotive and non-locomotive physical activity (PA) by age and gender are lacking for Japanese adults. The purpose of this study was to investigate objectively the levels of PA in each intensity in adults and older people by both genders living in Japan with triaxial accelerometry with discrimination between locomotive and non-locomotive PA. Methods In 571 women and 315 men aged 18-92 years from the Kanto region, PA was assessed for 6 consecutive days with a triaxial accelerometer (Active style Pro: HJA-350IT), and minutes of light and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) classified by metabolic equivalents were evaluated. Results Japanese elderly women over 70 years, spent less time in not only locomotive PA (light and MVPA), but also in non-locomotive MVPA. For non-locomotive light activity, however, there was no significant difference between women over 70 years and younger women. In contrast, for men, non-locomotive light activity and MVPA remained constant with age, while elderly men over 70 years spent less time in locomotive activities (light and MVPA). Women spent more time in non-locomotive activity than men, except for MVPA in elderly individuals, and time in non-locomotive MVPA occupied more than half of the total MVPA in all age groups for women. Conclusions These findings suggest that the intensity and the type of PA for Japanese were obviously affected by age, while locomotive PA for men and non-locomotive light PA for Japanese women were obviously unaffected by age. The finding also indicates gender differences. Thus, evaluation of both locomotive and non-locomotive activity is important in the overall assessment of PA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据