Subjective Daily Physical Activity Measures in Heart Disease: A Systematic Review.
accelerometry
questionnaire
reliability
validity
Journal
Journal of physical activity & health
ISSN: 1543-5474
Titre abrégé: J Phys Act Health
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101189457
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 04 2021
01 04 2021
Historique:
received:
05
10
2020
revised:
28
12
2020
accepted:
14
01
2021
pubmed:
6
3
2021
medline:
7
10
2021
entrez:
5
3
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The measurement of daily physical activity (DPA) is important for the prognosis and quantifying clinical outcomes in individuals with heart disease. The measurement of DPA is more feasible using subjective measures when compared with objective measures. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to identify the subjective measures of DPA that have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease to assist clinician and researcher instrument selection. A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases was performed. Methodological rigor was assessed using 3 different quality appraisal tools. Qualitative synthesis of included studies was performed. Twenty-two unique studies covering 19 subjective DPA measures were ultimately included. Methodological rigor was generally fair, and validity coefficients were moderate at best. Only 4 subjective measures that have established test-retest reliability and that provide an estimate of energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents, or minutes of DPA were compared against accelerometry or a DPA diary in patients with heart disease: SWISS Physical Activity Questionnaire, Total Activity Measure 1 and 2, and Mobile Physical Activity Logger. Depending on the clinician or researcher needs, instrument selection would depend on the recall period and the DPA construct being measured.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The measurement of daily physical activity (DPA) is important for the prognosis and quantifying clinical outcomes in individuals with heart disease. The measurement of DPA is more feasible using subjective measures when compared with objective measures. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to identify the subjective measures of DPA that have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease to assist clinician and researcher instrument selection.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases was performed. Methodological rigor was assessed using 3 different quality appraisal tools. Qualitative synthesis of included studies was performed.
RESULTS
Twenty-two unique studies covering 19 subjective DPA measures were ultimately included. Methodological rigor was generally fair, and validity coefficients were moderate at best.
CONCLUSIONS
Only 4 subjective measures that have established test-retest reliability and that provide an estimate of energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents, or minutes of DPA were compared against accelerometry or a DPA diary in patients with heart disease: SWISS Physical Activity Questionnaire, Total Activity Measure 1 and 2, and Mobile Physical Activity Logger. Depending on the clinician or researcher needs, instrument selection would depend on the recall period and the DPA construct being measured.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33668019
doi: 10.1123/jpah.2020-0661
pii: jpah.2020-0661
doi:
pii:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
450-460Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn