Physical activity of physiotherapy students and the role of device-based monitoring in their future clinical practice: a cohort study

• Autorzy: Michalcikova T. , Vorlicek M. , Pechova J. , Jakubec L. , Fromel K. , Neumannova K.

Warianty tytułu

PL

Aktywność fizyczna studentów fizjoterapii i rola monitoringu z wykorzystaniem urządzeń w ich przyszłej praktyce klinicznej: badanie kohortowe

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background. Although physiotherapy students are expected to promote and prescribe exercise, their own physical activity (PA) levels have not been fully researched using wearable devices to provide objective measurements of PA. This study aimed (1) to determine their PA level; and (2) to verify the use of wearables for physiotherapy students’ own practical benefits. Material and methods. Students (n=257) wore a pedometer (Yamax Digi-Walker SW-700) and wrist-based activity tracker (Garmin Vívofit 1) for seven consecutive days. Prior to monitoring, they completed the long form of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-LF). A further evaluation was completed, relating to benefits and shortcomings of PA monitoring in their own practice. Results. A significant difference emerged between PA levels recorded with activity trackers on weekdays and weekend days, but only when gender and years of study were not taken into consideration. Specifically, 61.09% of participants were active or highly active on weekdays and none were sedentary. On the weekend, however, 47.47% were active or highly active and 11.67% were sedentary. Most (~79%) subjects reported clear benefits in PA monitoring. Conclusions. The student cohort were clearly active during the week, but almost half were insufficiently active in the weekend and thus, greater focus on the promotion of PA in physiotherapists-in-training might be necessary. The self-monitoring of PA under ambulatory conditions (using two wearable devices), combined with self-evaluation of PA, were study strengths.

PL

Wprowadzenie. Chociaż oczekuje się, że studenci fizjoterapii będą promować i zalecać ćwiczenia innym, poziom ich własnej aktywności fizycznej (AF), szczególnie w odniesieniu do pomiarów dokonywanych za pomocą urządzeń, nie został dokładnie zbadany. Celem badania było (1) określenie poziomu aktywności fizycznej oraz (2) zweryfikowanie i wskazanie korzyści zastosowania narzędzi w praktyce studentów fizjoterapii. Materiał i metody. Studenci (n=257) nosili krokomierz (Yamax Digi-Walker SW-700) oraz opaskę na nadgarstku monitorującą aktywność (Garmin Vívofit 1) przez siedem kolejnych dni. Przed rozpoczęciem pomiaru wypełnili długą wersję Międzynarodowego Kwestionariusza Aktywności Fizycznej (IPAQ-LF). Dodatkowo dokonano oceny zalet i wad kontroli aktywności fizycznej w ich przyszłej praktyce. Wyniki. Jedynie po wykluczeniu płci i roku studiów zaobserwowano znaczącą różnicę między poziomami aktywności w dni robocze i w weekendy. Wyniki wykazały, że 61,09% uczestników badania było aktywnych bądź bardzo aktywnych, a żaden z nich nie prowadził spoczynkowego trybu w dni powszednie. W weekendy z kolei aktywnych bądź bardzo aktywnych uczestników było 47,47%, a 11,67% utrzymywało spoczynkowy poziom aktywności. Niemal 79% badanych zauważyło zalety monitorowania aktywności fizycznej. Wnioski. Badana grupa studentów była niewątpliwie aktywna w dni robocze, ale prawie połowa studentów była aktywna w stopniu niewystarczającym w weekendy, co oznacza, że należałoby przywiązywać większą wagę do promocji aktywności fizycznej wśród osób przygotowujących się do wykonywania zawodu fizjoterapeuty. Główną zaletą niniejszego badania była samodzielna kontrola i ocena poziomu aktywności fizycznej przez studentów fizjoterapii dokonana za pomocą dwóch różnych typów przenośnych urządzeń elektronicznych.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

physiotherapy; student; physical activity; activity tracker; monitoring; clinical practice

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Health Problems of Civilization
• Rocznik: 2020
• Tom: 14
• Numer: 2
• Opis fizyczny: p.107-117,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Michalcikova T.

• Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic

autor

Vorlicek M.

• Institute of Active Lifestyle, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic

autor

Pechova J.

• Institute of Active Lifestyle, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic

autor

Jakubec L.

• Institute of Active Lifestyle, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic

autor

Fromel K.

• Institute of Active Lifestyle, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic
• Faculty of Physical Education, Jerzy Kukuczka Academy of Physical Education, Katowice, Poland

autor

Neumannova K.

• Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Physical Culture, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic

Bibliografia

• 1. Cliff DP, Hesketh KD, Vella SA, Hinkley T, Tsiros MD, Ridgers ND, et al. Objectively measured sedentary behaviour and health and development in children and adolescents: systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2016; 17: 330-344. https://doi.org/10.1111/obr.12371
• 2. Hansen BH, Kolle E, Steene-Johannessen J, Dalene KE, Ekelund U, Anderssen SA. Monitoring population levels of physical activity and sedentary time in Norway across the lifespan. Scand J Med Sci Spor. 2018; 29(1): 105-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/sms.13314
• 3. Milanović Z, Pantelić S, Sporiš G, Kostić R, James N. Age-related decrease in physical activity and functional fitness among elderly men and women. Clin Interv Aging. 2013; 8: 549-556. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S44112
• 4. Owen N, Healy GN, Matthews CE, Dustan DW. Too much sitting: the population-health science of sedentary behavior. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2010; 38(3): 105-113. https://doi.org/10.1097/JES.0b013e3181e373a2
• 5. Sigmundová D, Chmelík F, Sigmund E, Feltlova D, Frömel K. Physical activity in the lifestyle of Czech university students: meeting health recommendations. Eur J Sport Sci. 2013; 13(6): 744-750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2013.776638
• 6. Van Dyck D, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Deliens T. Can changes in psychosocial factors and residency explain the decrease in physical activity during the transition from high school to college or university?. Int J Behav Med. 2015; 22(2): 178-186. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12529-014-9424-4
• 7. Dean E, Umerah G, Dornelas de Andrade A, Söderlung A, Skinner M. The third physical therapy summit on global health: health-based competencies. Physiother. 2015; 101(Suppl. 1): e13-e14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2015.03.020
• 8. Chevan J, Haskvitz EM. Do as I do: Exercise habits of physical therapists, physical therapist sssistants, and student physical therapists. Phys Ther. 2010; 90: 726-734. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20090112
• 9. Lowe A, Gee M, McLean S, Littlewood C, Lindsay C, Everett S. Physical activity promotion in physiotherapy practice: a systematic scoping review of a decade of literature. Brit J Sport Med. 2016; 52(2): 122-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096735
• 10. Freene N, Cools S, Bissett B. Are we missing opportunities? Physiotherapy and physical activity promotion: a cross-sectional survey. BMC Sports Sci. Med. Rehabil. 2017; 9(19): 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13102-017-0084-y
• 11. Lowe A, Littlewood C, McLean S, Kilner K. Physiotherapy and physical activity: a cross-sectional survey exploring physical activity promotion, knowledge of physical activity guidelines and the physical activity habits of UK physiotherapists. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2017; 3(1): 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2017-000290
• 12. Dąbrowska-Galas M, Plinta R, Dąbrowska J, Skrzypulec-Plinta V. Physical activity in students of the Medical University of Silesia in Poland. Phys Ther. 2013; 93: 384-392. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20120065
• 13. Kamwendo K, Faresjö T, Gustavsson U, Jansson M. Adherence to healthy lifestyles – a comparison of nursing and physiotherapy students. Adv Physiother. 2000; 2: 63-74.
• 14. Korn L, Gonen E, Shaked Y, Golan M. Health perceptions, self and body image, physical activity and nutrition among undergraduate students in Israel. PLoS ONE. 2013; 8(3): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0058543
• 15. Mahony R, Blake C, Matthews J, O’Donnoghue G, Cunningham C. Physical activity levels and self-determined motivation among future healthcare professionals: utility of the Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire (BREQ-2). Physiother. Theory Pract. 2018; 39(9): 884-890. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2018.1457112
• 16. Michalak K, Cieślak A, Poziomska-Piątkowska E. Personal exercise behavior and attitudes towards physical activity among physiotherapy students. Environ Med. 2015; 18(4): 41-45.
• 17. Oyeyemi AL, Muhammed S, Oyeyemi AY, Adegoke B. Patterns of objectively assessed physical activity and sedentary time: are Nigerian health professional students complying with public health guidelines?. PLoS ONE. 2017; 12(12): e0190124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0190124
• 18. Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut M, Bassett DR jr. Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. J Sci Med Sport. 2003; 35: 1455-1460. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078932.61440.A2
• 19. Schneider PL, Crouter SE, Bassett DR jr. Pedometer measures of free-living physical activity: comparison of 13 models. Med Sci Sport Exer. 2004; 36(2): 331-335. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000113486.60548.E9
• 20. Mendoza M, Han M, Meyring-Wösten A, Wilund K, Kotanko P. It’s a non-dialysis day… Do you know how your patient is doing? A case for research into interdialytic activity. Blood Purif. 2015; 39(1-3): 74-83. https://doi.org/10.1159/000369430
• 21. Šimůnek A, Dygrýn J, Jakubec L, Neuls F, Frömel K, Welk GJ. Validity of Garmin Vívo fit 1 and Garmin Vívo fit 3 for school-based physical activity monitoring. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2019; 31(1): 130-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/pes.2018-0019
• 22. Cull A, Sprangers M, Bjordal K, Aaronson N, West K, Bottomley A. EORTC quality of life group translation procedure (2nd ed.). Brussels: EORTC Quality of Life Unit; 2002.
• 23. Frömel K, Kudláček M, Groffik D, Svozil Z, Šimůnek A, Garbaciak W. Promoting healthy lifestyle and wellbeing in adolescents through outdoor physical activity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2017; 14(5): 1-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14050533
• 24. Mitáš J, Sas-Nowosielski K, Groffik D, Frömel K. The safety of the neighborhood environment and physical activity in Czech and Polish adolescents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2018; 15(126): 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15010126
• 25. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics. Healthy People 2010 Final Review [Internet]. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics; 2012 [cited 2019 Apr 20]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hpdata2010/hp2010_final_review.pdf
• 26. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2020: Topics & Objectives. Physical activity [Internet]. Rockville, MD: Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion [cited 2019 Apr 20]. Available from: https://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topics-objectives/topic/physical-activity
• 27. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Physical activity guidelines for Americans, 2nd edition [Internet]. Washington: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2018 [cited 2019 Apr 20]. Available from: https://health.gov/paguidelines/second-edition/pdf/Physical_Activity_Guidelines_2nd_edition.pdf
• 28. Gelius P, Rütten A, Goodwin L, Marin M, Abu-Omar K, Kahlmeier S, et al. Study on the implementation of the European physical activity guidelines [Internet]. Luxemburg: Publication Office of the European Union; 2016 [cited 2019 Aug 12]. Available from: https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/sites/eacea-site/files/study_implementation_pa_guidelines_2016.pdf. http://dx.doi.org/10.2766/42027
• 29. Tudor-Locke C, Bassett DRJ. How many steps/day are enough? Preliminary pedometer indices for public health. Sports Med. Alert. 2004; 34(1): 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00007256-200434010-00001
• 30. Tudor-Locke C, Giles-Corti B, Knuiman M, McCormack G. Tracking of pedometer-determined physical activity in adults who relocate: results from RESIDE. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2008; 5(39): 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-5-39
• 31. Conroy DE, Elavsky S, Doerksen SE, Maher JP. A daily process analysis of intentions and physical activity in college students. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2013; 35: 493-502.
• 32. Frömel K, Kudlacek M, Groffik D, Chmelik F, Jakubec L. Differences in the intensity of physical activity during school days and weekends in Polish and Czech boys and girls. Ann Agr Env Med. 2016; 23(2): 357-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.5604/12321966.1203905
• 33. Öhman A, Stenlund H, Dahlgren L. Career choice, professional preferences and gender – the case of Swedish physiotherapy students. Adv Physiother. 2001; 3: 94-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/140381901750475348
• 34. Hoare E, Stavreski B, Jennings GL, Kingwell BA. Exploring motivation and barriers to physical activity among active and inactive Australian adults. Sports. 2017; 5(47): 1-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/sports5030047
• 35. Felton GM, Tudor-Locke C, Burkett L. Reliability of pedometer-determined free-living physical activity data in college women. Res Q Exercise Sport. 2006; 77: 304-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02701367.2006.10599364
• 36. Nash Castro LS, Svastisalee CM, Mendes R, Fontaine O, Breda J. School-based physical activity and good practices in Europe. Health Prob Civil. 2019; 13(1): 9-18. https://doi.org/10.5114/hpc.2018.80226
• 37. Healey W. Physical therapist student approaches to learning during clinical education experiences: a qualitative study [Abstract]. J Phys Ther Educ. 2008; 22(1): 49-58.
• 38. Ranasinghe C, Sigera C, Ranasinghe P, Jayawardena R, Ranasinghe ACR, Hills AP, et al. Physical inactivity among physiotherapy undergraduates: exploring the knowledge-practice gap. BMC Sports Sci. Med. Rehabil. 2016; 8(39): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-016-0063-8
• 39. Barrett EM, Darker CD, Hussey J. Promotion of physical activity in primary care: knowledge and practice of general practitioners and physiotherapists. J Public Health. 2013; 21: 63-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-012-0512-0
• 40. Mouton A, Mugnier B, Demoulin C, Cloes M. Physical therapists’ knowledge, attitudes, and believes about physical activity: a prerequisite to their role in physical activity promotion. J Phys Ther Educ. 2014; 28: 120-127.
• 41. Clifford R. Promoting physical activity for health. A survey of knowledge, confidence and role-perception in final-year UK physiotherapy students. Physiother Pract Res. 2018; 39: 53-62. https://doi.org/10.3233/PPR-170106
• 42. Sanders JP, Loveday A, Pearson N, Edwardson C, Yates T, Biddle SJ, et al. Devices for self-monitoring sedentary time or physical activity: a scoping review. J Med Internet Res. 2016; 18(5): e90. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.5373

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5114/hpc.2020.94271