PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2018 | 12 | 1 |
Tytuł artykułu

Physical activity assessment tools in monitoring physical activity: the global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ), the international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ) or accelerometers - choosing the best tools

Autorzy
Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
PL
Narzędzia badawcze w monitorowaniu aktywności fizycznej: globalny kwestionariusz aktywności fizycznej (GPAQ), międzynarodowy kwestionariusz aktywności fizycznej (IPAQ) czy akcelerometry – jaki wybór jest najlepszy?
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
Assessing physical activity in epidemiological studies is a severe challenge for researchers, whose overriding aim is to obtain accurate, truthful and reliable data on the level of physical activity in different population groups. Presently, both objective and subjective measurement methods are used. The tools used in objective methods are usually pedometers and accelerometers, while in subjective are used questionnaires conducted and run either as self-reported or by a trained interviewer. At the end of the 1990s, experts in the field of epidemiology of physical activity began developing normalised and standardised tools for subjective assessment of physical activity. After several years of experience, we know that well-chosen and properly validated tools used in the testing process conducted in accordance with recommended standards are a prerequisite for obtaining accurate, truthful and reliable data. Although there are over 90 different questionnaires for physical activity, the two most commonly used are the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). On the other hand, objective tools such as pedometers or accelerometers are used more and more frequently in cohort and experimental studies, but also those concerning populations. The article reviews the literature on the criteria of selection and usage of these popular tools. The advantages and disadvantages of each of them and the results of the most important comparative validation studies are discussed.
PL
Ocena aktywności fizycznej w badaniach epidemiologicznych jest poważnym wyzwaniem dla badaczy. Celem nadrzędnym jest pozyskanie dokładnych, prawdziwych i rzetelnych danych dotyczących poziomu aktywności fizycznej różnych populacji. Obecnie, wykorzystywane są zarówno obiektywne jak i subiektywne metody pomiarowe. Narzędziami w badaniach obiektywnych są najczęściej pedometry oraz akcelerometry, natomiast w subiektywnych różnego rodzaju kwestionariusze prowadzone samodzielnie lub przez przeszkolonego ankietera. Pod koniec lat 90. XX wieku, eksperci zajmujący się epidemiologią aktywności fizycznej rozpoczęli opracowywanie znormalizowanych i wystandaryzowanych narzędzi do subiektywnej oceny wysiłków fizycznych. Po kilkunastu latach doświadczeń wiemy, że dobrze dobrane i prawidłowo zwalidowane narzędzia oraz przeprowadzenie procesu badawczego zgodnie z zalecanymi standardami, jest niezbędnym warunkiem do pozyskania dokładnych, prawdziwych i rzetelnych danych. Chociaż istnieje ponad 90 różnych kwestionariuszy aktywności fizycznej, najczęściej wykorzystywane są dwa: Międzynarodowy Kwestionariusz Aktywności Fizycznej (IPAQ) oraz Globalny Kwestionariusz Aktywności Fizycznej (GPAQ). W badaniach kohortowych i eksperymentalnych ale także coraz częściej w badaniach populacyjnych są wykorzystywane narzędzia obiektywne w postaci pedometrów lub akcelerometrów. W artykule dokonano przeglądu piśmiennictwa na temat kryteriów wyboru i zasad korzystania z tych popularnych narzędzi. Omówiono zalety i wady każdego z nich oraz zamieszczono wyniki najważniejszych porównawczych badań walidacyjnych.
Wydawca
-
Rocznik
Tom
12
Numer
1
Opis fizyczny
p.57-63,ref.
Twórcy
autor
  • Department of Health and Social Sciences, Pope John Paul II State School of Higher Education in Biala Podlaska, Sidorska 95/97, 21-500 Biala Podlaska, Poland
Bibliografia
  • 1. Thomas JR, Silverman SJ, Nelson JK. Research Methods in Physical Activity. Human Kinetics; 2010.
  • 2. Steyn K, Sliwa K, Hawken S, Commerford P, Onen C, Damasceno A, et al. Risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in Africa: the INT ERHEART Africa study. Circulation. 2005: 112 (23): 3554-3561. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULAT IONA HA.105.563452
  • 3. Oja P, Kelly P, Pedišić Ž, Titze S, Bauman A, Foster C, et al. Associations of specific types of sports and exercise with all-cause and cardiovascular-disease mortality: a cohort study of 80 306 British adults. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2017: 51(10): 812-817. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096822
  • 4. Nocon M, Hiemann T, ller-Riemenschneider FM, Thalau F, Roll S, Willich SN. Association of physical activity with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation. 2008: 15(3): 239-246. https://doi.org/10.1097/HJR.0b013e3282f55e09
  • 5. Samitz G, Egger M, Zwahlen M. Domains of physical activity and all-cause mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2011: 40(5): 1382-1400. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyr112
  • 6. Berlin JA, Colditz GA. A meta-analysis of physical activity in the prevention of coronary heart disease. American Journal of Epidemiology. 1990; 132(4): 612–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115704
  • 7. Cook S, Auinger P, Li C, Ford ES. Metabolic syndrome rates in United States adolescents, from the NationalHealth and Nutrition Examination Survey,1999-2002.The Journal of Pediatrics.2008; 152(2): 165–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.06.004
  • 8. Saris WHM, Blair SN, van Baak MA, Eaton SB, Davies PSW, Di Pietro L, et al. How much physical activity is enough to prevent unhealthy weight gain? Outcome of the IASO 1st Stock Conference and consensus statement. Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity. 2003; 4(2): 101–14. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1467-789X.2003.00101.x
  • 9. Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee Report, 2008. To the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Part A: executive summary. Nutrition rewiews. 2009; 67(2): 114-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-4887.2008.00136.x
  • 10. Steffl M, Bohannon RW, Sontakova L, Tufano JJ, Shiells K, Holmerova I. Relationship between sarcopenia and physical activity in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Interventions in Aging. 2017; 12: 835–45. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S132940
  • 11. Friedenreich CM, Orenstein MR. Physical activity and cancer prevention: etiologic evidence and biological mechanisms. Journal of Nutrition. 2002; 132(11): 3456–64.
  • 12. Touvier M, Kesse-Guyot E, Méjean C, Pollet C, Malon A, Castetbon K, et al. Comparison between an interactive web-based self-administered 24 h dietary record and an interview by a dietitian for large-scale epidemiological studies. British Journal of Nutrition. 2011; 105(7): 1055–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114510004617
  • 13. World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. 2011
  • 14. World Health Organization. Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health: a framework to monitor and evaluate implementation. 2006.
  • 15. World Health Organization. Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: report of a joint WHO/FAO expert consultation. 2003.
  • 16. Guthold R, Ono T, Strong KL, Chatterji S, Morabia A. Worldwide Variability in Physical Inactivity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2008; 34(6): 486–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.02.013
  • 17. Armstrong T, Bonita R. Capacity building for an integrated noncommunicable disease risk factor surveillance system in developing countries. Ethnicity & Disease. 2003; 13(2)
  • 18. Cleland CL , Hunter RF, Kee F, Cupples ME, Sallis JF, Tully MA. Validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) in assessing levels and change in moderate-vigorous physical activity and sedentary behaviour. BMC public health. 2014; 14(1): 92. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1255
  • 19. Bull FC, Armstrong T, Maslin TS. Global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ): nine country reliability and validity study. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2009; 6(6): 790–804.
  • 20. Van Dyck D, Cardon G, Deforche B, Giles-Corti B, Sallis JF, Owen N, et al. Environmental and Psychosocial Correlates of Accelerometer-Assessed and Self-Reported Physical Activity in Belgian Adults. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 2011; 18(3): 235–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-010-9127-4
  • 21. Tudor-Locke C, Mire EF, Dentro KN, Barreira TV, Schuna JM, Zhao P, et al. A model for presenting accelerometer paradata in large studies: ISCOL E. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2015; 12(1): 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0213-5
  • 22. Berkemeyer K, Wijndaele K, White T, Cooper AJ, Luben R, Westgate K, et al. The descriptive epidemiology of accelerometer-measured physical activity in older adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2016; 13(1): 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0316-z
  • 23. Kim Y, Hibbing P, Saint-Maurice PF, Ellingson LD, Hennessy E, Wolff-Hughes DL, et al. Surveillance of Youth Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior With Wrist Accelerometry. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2017; 52(6): 872–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2017.01.012
  • 24. Assembly WHO. Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. 2004; 1–18.
  • 25. Craig CL , Marshall AL , Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2003; 35(8): 1381–95. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB
  • 26. Bauman AE, Sallis JF. Global Problems Require Global Studies. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2008; 34(6): 544–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.03.001
  • 27. Tomioka K, Iwamoto J, Saeki K, Okamoto N. Reliability and Validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) in Elderly Adults:The Fujiwara-kyo Study. Journal of Epidemiology. 2011; 21(6): 459–65. https://doi.org/10.2188/jea.JE20110003
  • 28. Crinière L, Lhommet C, Caille A, Giraudeau B, Lecomte P, Couet C, et al. Reproducibility and Validity of the French Version of the Long International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of Physical Activity & Health [Internet]. 2011; 8(6): 858–65. https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.8.6.858
  • 29. Bertheussen GF, Oldervoll L, Kaasa S, Sandmæl J-A, Helbostad JL. Measurement of physical activity in cancer survivors - a comparison of the HUNT 1 Physical Activity Questionnaire (HUNT 1 PA-Q) with the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and aerobic capacity. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2013; 21(2): 449–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1530-8
  • 30. Hagströmer M, Bergman P, De Bourdeaudhuij I, Ortega FB, Ruiz JR, Manios Y, et al. Concurrent validity of a modified version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-A) in European adolescents: The HELENA Study. International journal of obesity. 2008; 32 Suppl 5: S42. https://doi.org/10.1038/ijo.2008.182
  • 31. Armstrong T, Bull F. Development of the World Health Organization Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). Journal of Public Health. 2006; 14(2): 66–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-006-0024-x
  • 32. Mathews E, Salvo D, Sarma PS, Thankappan KR, PRATT M. Adapting and Validating the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) for Trivandrum, India. 2013. Preventing chronic disease. 2016; 13(4): 150528. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd13.150528
  • 33. Herrmann SD, Heumann KJ, Ananian CA Der, AINSWO RTH BE. Validity and Reliability of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). Measurement in Physical Education and Exercise Science. 2013; 17(3): 221–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/1091367X.2013.805139
  • 34. Hoos T, Espinoza N, Marshall SJ, Arredondo EM. Validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) in adult Latinas. Journal of Physical Activity & Health. 2012;9(5):698–705.
  • 35. World Health Organization. Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ). 2006.
  • 36. Anjana RM, Sudha V, Lakshmipriya N, Subhashini S, Pradeepa R, Geetha L, et al. Reliability and validity of a new physical activity questionnaire for India. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2015; 12(1): 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-015-0196-2
  • 37. Wasilewska M. In search of the assessment of the physical activity level of the youth with the use of the IPAQ. Health Problems of Civilization. 2017; 1: 15–22. https://doi.org/10.5114/hpc.2017.65524
  • 38. Crouter SE, Horton M, Bassett DR., Validity of ActiGraph Child-Specific Equations during Various Physical Activities. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. 2013; 45(7): 1403–9. https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e318285f03b
  • 39. Calabró MA, Lee JM, Saint-Maurice PF, Yoo H, Welk GJ. Validity of physical activity monitors for assessing lower intensity activity in adults. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity. 2014; 11(1): 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-014-0119-7
  • 40. Van Poppel MNM, Chinapaw MJM, Mokkink LB, Van Mechelen W, Terwee CB. Physical activity questionnaires for adults: a systematic review of measurement properties. Sports medicine (Auckland, NZ ). 2010; 40(7): 565–600. https://doi.org/10.2165/11531930-000000000-00000
  • 41. Misra P, Upadhyay RP, Krishnan A, Sharma N, Kapoor SK. A community based study to test the reliability and validity of physical activity measurement techniques. International Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2014 Aug 1; 5(8): 952–9.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.agro-30188c54-4c3f-4212-a1f8-a70cf07c5e7a
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.