Accelerometer-measured absolute versus relative physical activity intensity: cross-sectional associations with cardiometabolic health in midlife

BACKGROUND: Observational studies investigating the association between accelerometer-measured physical activity and health all use absolute measures of physical activity intensity. However, intervention studies suggest that the physical activity intensity required to improve health is relative to individual fitness. The aim of this study was to investigate the associations between accelerometer-measured absolute and relative physical activity intensity and cardiometabolic health, and what implications these associations may have on the interpretation of health-associated physical activity. METHODS: A sample of the cross-sectional Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS) consisting of 4,234 men and women aged 55–64 years was studied. Physical activity intensity was measured by accelerometry and expressed as absolute (e.g., metabolic equivalents of task) or relative (percentage of maximal oxygen consumption). Fitness was estimated by the submaximal Ekblom-Bak test. A composite (‘metabolic syndrome’) score combined measures of waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, high-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, and glycated hemoglobin. Associations of absolute and relative physical activity intensity with the health indicators (i.e., fitness and metabolic syndrome score) were studied by partial least squares regression. Analyses were stratified by fitness level. RESULTS: Both absolute and relative physical activity intensity associated with the health indicators. However, the strongest associations for absolute intensity varied depending on fitness levels, whereas the associations for relative intensity were more synchronized across fitness groups. The dose–response relationship between moderate-to-vigorous intensity and the health indicators was stronger for relative than for absolute intensity. The absolute and relative moderate-to-vigorous intensity cut-offs intersected at the 5th fitness percentile, indicating that the absolute intensity cut-off is too low for 95% of individuals in this sample. While 99% of individuals fulfilled the general physical activity recommendations based on absolute intensity measures, only 21% fulfilled the recommendations based on relative intensity measures. In relation to a “sufficient” fitness level, 9% fulfilled the recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Accelerometer-measured relative physical activity intensity represents the intensity related to health benefits regardless of fitness level. Traditional absolute moderate intensity accelerometer cut-offs are too low for most individuals and should be adapted to the fitness level in the sample studied. Absolute and relative physical activity intensity cannot be used interchangeably. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-023-17281-4.