Reliability and Validity of the Dutch Version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Patients After Total Hip Arthroplasty or Total Knee Arthroplasty

Blikman, Tim; Stevens, Martin; Bulstra, Sjoerd K.; Akker‐Scheek, Inge van den; Reininga, Inge H. F.

doi:10.2519/jospt.2013.4422

Cited by 33 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The measurement error in the HAP, IPAQ‐SF, and PASE has been evaluated, while there is no minimally important change index to assess the adequacy of measurement error in these instruments. The standard error of measurement in the IPAQ‐SF and PASE was large compared to their maximal possible scoring range, while that in the HAP was small, which suggests large measurement error in populations with joint pain attributable to OA in the IPAQ‐SF and PASE (Table ). For construct validity in populations with joint pain attributable to OA, the Baecke questionnaire, IPAQ‐SF, and PASE demonstrated only low‐to‐moderate correlations (range 0.06–0.49) with accelerometers (Table ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For reliability, 8 studies were evaluated as being of poor quality, because a small sample size was used (<50 individuals) ; sample sizes of <50 are considered to be too small for evaluating measurement properties . Five studies that assessed reliability were evaluated as being of fair quality because their sample size was >50 individuals, and a correlation rather than a test for agreement (ICC) was used .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 2 studies that evaluated criterion validity were evaluated as being of poor quality due to their sample size . Of the studies evaluating construct validity, 7 were evaluated as poor quality due to sample size ; 3 were evaluated as fair quality (although the sample size was deemed appropriate, these studies used pedometers or heart monitors rather than accelerometers) ; 12 studies were evaluated as good quality, with sample sizes >50 but <100 ; and 10 studies were evaluated as excellent quality, with sample sizes >100 . Only 1 of the studies in this review used hypothesis testing to evaluate construct validity .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Identification and Evaluation of Self‐Report Physical Activity Instruments in Adults With Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Smith

Dziedzic

Quicke

et al. 2019

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. To identify and evaluate the measurement properties of self-report physical activity instruments suitable for patients with osteoarthritis (OA).Methods. We conducted a comprehensive 2-stage systematic review using multiple electronic databases, from inception until July 2018. In the stage 1 review, we sought to identify all self-report physical activity instruments used in individuals with joint pain attributable to OA in the foot, knee, hip, or hand. In the stage 2 review, we searched for and appraised studies investigating the measurement properties of the instruments identified. In both stages of the review, we screened all articles for study eligibility criteria, completed data extraction using the Qualitative Attributes and Measurement Properties of Physical Activity questionnaire checklist, and conducted methodology quality assessments using a modified COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) checklist. Measurement properties for each physical activity instrument were evaluated and combined, using narrative synthesis.Results. In the stage 1 review, we identified 23 unique self-report physical activity instruments. In the stage 2 review, we identified 54 studies that evaluated the measurement properties of 13 of the 23 instruments identified. Instrument reliability varied from inadequate to adequate (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.7). Instrument construct and criterion validity assessment showed small to moderate correlations with direct measures of physical activity. Instrument responsiveness was assessed in only 1 instrument and was unable to detect changes in comparison to accelerometers.Conclusion. Although many instruments were identified as being potentially suitable for use in patients with OA, none demonstrated adequate measurement properties across all domains of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Further high-quality assessment of self-report physical activity instruments is required before such measures can be recommended for use in OA research.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identification and Evaluation of Self‐Report Physical Activity Instruments in Adults With Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Smith

Dziedzic

Quicke

et al. 2019

Arthritis Care & Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Actigraph accelerometer [33]. Due to systematic bias and large standard errors from the IPAQ measure and minimal detectable change, the IPAQ may only be suitable for intergroup comparisons [34]. Blinding was impractical in this study, and is a limitation, as the Holstebro Health Care Centre is a small unit.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effectiveness of a brief theory-based health promotion intervention among adults at high risk of type 2 diabetes: One-year results from a randomised trial in a community setting

Juul

Andersen

Arnoldsen

et al. 2016

Primary Care Diabetes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The IPAQ records the activity of four intensity levels: 1) vigorous-intensity activity such as aerobics, 2) moderate-intensity activity such as leisure cycling, 3) walking, and 4) sitting. The Dutch version of the IPAQ is considered valid and reliable [42]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of the posterolateral versus the direct anterior approach for THA (POLADA – trial)

Rykov

Reininga

Knobben

et al. 2016

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures. Because of the increasing number of THAs, a growing demand for faster recovery and a greater emphasis on cost-effectiveness, minimally invasive THAs have been introduced in the last decades. The direct anterior approach is a minimally invasive, tissue-sparing approach in which intermuscular planes are used. Theoretically, this approach should result in a faster recovery of physical functioning and higher health-related quality of life.Methods/designA randomised controlled trial will be performed. Patients will be randomly allocated to undergo THA by means of the anterior or posterolateral approach. Both the intervention and control group will consist of two subgroups: 1) patients with a good bone stock who will receive an uncemented femoral stem, and 2) patients with a poor bone stock who will receive a cemented femoral stem. Patients between 18 and 90 years with primary or secondary osteoarthritis will be included. Physical functioning and health-related quality of life will be assessed by means of questionnaires. Additionally, performance based tests will be performed to objectively assess the physical functioning. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed by obtaining data on medical costs in and outside the hospital and other nonmedical costs. Measurements will take place preoperatively, two and six weeks, three months and one year postoperatively.DiscussionThere is some evidence that the anterior approach results in reduced tissue damage and faster recovery in the direct postoperative period, compared to the posterolateral approach. However, there is still a lack of well-designed studies that have confirmed the better outcomes and cost-effectiveness of the anterior approach. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the physical functioning, health related quality of life and the cost-effectiveness of the anterior approach, compared to the conventional posterolateral approach.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Registry, number 5343 (registration date April 12, 2015)Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-016-1322-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Reliability and Validity of the Dutch Version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Patients After Total Hip Arthroplasty or Total Knee Arthroplasty

Cited by 33 publications

References 38 publications

Identification and Evaluation of Self‐Report Physical Activity Instruments in Adults With Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Identification and Evaluation of Self‐Report Physical Activity Instruments in Adults With Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review

Effectiveness of a brief theory-based health promotion intervention among adults at high risk of type 2 diabetes: One-year results from a randomised trial in a community setting

The design of a randomised controlled trial to evaluate the (cost-) effectiveness of the posterolateral versus the direct anterior approach for THA (POLADA – trial)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About