Comparison of questionnaire and accelerometer-based assessments of physical activity in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: clinical and prognostic implications

Schmidt, Cristine; Santos, Mário; Bohn, Lucimére; Delgado, Bruno; Moreira-Gonçalves, Daniel; Leite‐Moreira, Adelino; Oliveira, José

doi:10.1080/14017431.2019.1707863

Cited by 12 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, the Bland-Altman plot for vigorous-intensity PA (IPAQ) provides evidence of proportional bias. These findings are consistent with previous studies and highlight the fact that measuring PA levels in the same person with these instruments leads to significant variations in magnitude and agreement [14,21,53].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Overall, results show a poor to moderate correlation between self-reported and accelerometer-based estimates of PA and sedentary behavior. Briefly, and in line with previous findings [14,21,44,53], low positive correlation coefficients were observed for IPAQ estimates (sedentary behavior, vigorous PA, and total PA) and moderate positive correlation for YPAS estimates of vigorous PA (r = 0.42, p < 0.001). The results also demonstrate a large variation between self-reported and Xiaomi Mi Band 2 ® -measured PA and sedentary time.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Altogether, the present findings confirm that the general agreement between selfreported and accelerometer-measured PA is poor, and the correlation coefficients lower than what is recommended [18]. The lack of correlation and agreement between methods may be explained by the fact that the instruments do not measure the same constructs [14,44]. While the accelerometer measures the motion through acceleration, and uses laboratoryderived intensity thresholds to determine how much time was spent at different intensities of movement (sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous), the questionnaires measure the time spent in specific domains and intensities [14,44].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…Indeed, self-report questionnaires have limited validity in measuring daily activities due to issues with question interpretation, imprecise recall, judgment formation, and response editing [8,11,12]. On the other hand, self-report measures are more feasible for use in large-scale studies because of their low cost and ease of use [8,9,[12][13][14]. Moreover, questionnaires can provide information on the type (e.g., leisure, household, work, transportation) and duration of PA (e.g., min.day −1 , min.wk −1 , h.wk −1 ) [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, self-report measures both underestimate sedentary time [17] and overestimate PA levels when compared to PA objective measures [17][18][19][20]. Furthermore, research conducted on the general population has suggested self-reported measures of PA as inaccurate and showing a weak to modest correspondence when compared with objective measures [13,14,21]. Therefore, one of the challenges is to select the most accurate and practical tool with a balance between precision and feasibility [8], both in research and in clinics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Association between Self-Reported and Accelerometer-Based Estimates of Physical Activity in Portuguese Older Adults

Domingos

Santos

Pêgo

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate assessment of physical activity (PA) is crucial in interventions promoting it and in studies exploring its association with health status. Currently, there is a wide range of assessment tools available, including subjective and objective measures. This study compared accelerometer-based estimates of PA with self-report PA data in older adults. Additionally, the associations between PA and health outcomes and PA profiles were analyzed. Participants (n = 110) wore a Xiaomi Mi Band 2® for fifteen consecutive days. Self-reported PA was assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and the Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS). The Spearman correlation coefficient was used to compare self-reported and accelerometer-measured PA and associations between PA and health. Bland–Altman plots were performed to assess the agreement between methods. Results highlight a large variation between self-reported and Xiaomi Mi Band 2® estimates, with poor general agreement. The highest difference was found for sedentary time. Low positive correlations were observed for IPAQ estimates (sedentary, vigorous, and total PA) and moderate for YPAS vigorous estimates. Finally, self-reported and objectively measured PA associated differently with health outcomes. Summarily, although accelerometry has the advantage of being an accurate method, self-report questionnaires could provide valuable information about the context of the activity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Association between Self-Reported and Accelerometer-Based Estimates of Physical Activity in Portuguese Older Adults

Domingos

Santos

Pêgo

2021

Sensors

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form and accelerometer‐assessed physical activity: concurrent validity using six cut‐points in HF patients

Blasco‐Peris,

Climent‐Paya,

Vetrovsky

et al. 2023

ESC Heart Failure

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimsPhysical activity (PA) is an important target for improving clinical outcomes in heart failure (HF) patients. Nonetheless, assessing the daily PA profile in this population is a challenging task, traditionally performed using self‐report questionnaires such as the International PA Questionnaire Short Form (IPAQ‐SF). This study aimed to evaluate the concurrent validity of the IPAQ‐SF and accelerometer‐assessed PA using six published cut‐points in patients with HF and reduced or mildly reduced ejection fraction.Methods and resultsThe concordance between the IPAQ‐SF and a hip‐worn accelerometer regarding daily time spent performing moderate to vigorous PA in bouts of at least 10 min was assessed in 53 participants for seven consecutive days using six different cut‐points (Barnett, Dibben, Mark, Sanders, Troiano, and Vaha‐Ypya). Spearman's correlation and Bland–Altman plots were used to evaluate concurrent validity between methods. Regressions were used to study the association between patient variables, wear protocol (waking hour or 24 h), and absolute bias. The kappa index was used to evaluate the concordance between IPAQ‐SF and accelerometry for classifying patients as active or non‐active. All analyses were re‐run using non‐bouted metrics to investigate the effect of bouted versus non‐bouted analysis. The IPAQ‐SF and accelerometry showed low to negligible correlation (ρ = 0.12 to 0.37), depending on the cut‐point used. The regression analysis showed that the absolute bias was higher in participants following the waking‐hour protocol at all cut‐points except Dibben's (P ≤ 0.007). The concordance between the two methods to classify patients as active and non‐active was low when using Mark (κ = 0.23) and Barnett (κ = 0.34) cut‐points and poor for the remaining cut‐points (κ = 0.03 to 0.18). The results of the sensitivity analysis showed negligible to low correlation using non‐bouted metrics (ρ = 0.27 to 0.33).ConclusionsModerate to vigorous PA measures using IPAQ‐SF and accelerometers are not equivalent, and we do not encourage researchers to use IPAQ‐SF alone when assessing PA in HF patients. Moreover, applying personalized collection and processing criteria is important when assessing PA in HF patients. We recommend following the 24 h protocol and selecting cut‐points calibrated in patients with cardiovascular diseases. Finally, it is necessary to develop a new tailored questionnaire that considers walking intensity and is adjusted to the current World Health Organisation recommendations, which use non‐bouted metrics.

show abstract

Physical activity and its clinical correlates in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limited data are available on physical activity (PhA) levels in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) patients, as well as on the clinical utility of PhA measurements using questionnaires and accelerometers.We aimed to study PhA levels of CTEPH patients and their clinical correlates, and to compare PhA levels measured by the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) with measures from accelerometers. This is a crosssectional study (n = 50). PhA levels were measured using accelerometers and questionnaires (IPAQ). Clinical parameters evaluated were walked distance on the 6-min-walking test (6MWT), pulmonary vascular resistance, N-terminal brain natriuretic peptide and quality of life (HRQoL) (Cambridge Pulmonary Hypertension Outcome Review questionnaire). Time spent in sedentary behavior was lower in self-reported measurement (279 ± 165 min/day) compared with accelerometry (446 ± 117 min/day, p < 0.000). Accelerometer-derived data showed that CTEPH patients spent 60% of the recorded time in sedentary behaviors and 2% in moderate-to-vigorous PhA (MVPA). Correlation analysis showed that MVPA was significantly correlated with 6MWT (p = 0.023) and symptom domain of HRQoL (p = 0.044). Self-reported MVPA was significantly higher than the one registered by the accelerometer (411 ± 569 vs. 131 ± 108 min/week, p = 0.027). Bland−Altman analysis indicated poor agreement between the two methods. Our results showed that CTEPH patients spend most of their days in sedentary behaviors and only a small amount of time in MVPA. Only MVPA was associated with HRQoL and CTEPH severity. In addition, we showed a poor agreement between selfreported and accelerometer-derived PhA in CTEPH patients, with the former overestimating the overall PhA.

show abstract

Comparison of questionnaire and accelerometer-based assessments of physical activity in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: clinical and prognostic implications

Cited by 12 publications

References 29 publications

Association between Self-Reported and Accelerometer-Based Estimates of Physical Activity in Portuguese Older Adults

Association between Self-Reported and Accelerometer-Based Estimates of Physical Activity in Portuguese Older Adults

International Physical Activity Questionnaire Short Form and accelerometer‐assessed physical activity: concurrent validity using six cut‐points in HF patients

Physical activity and its clinical correlates in chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About