Measuring change in trials of physical activity interventions: a comparison of self-report questionnaire and accelerometry within the PACE-UP trial.

Autor: Limb, Elizabeth S., Ahmad, Shaleen, Cook, Derek G., Kerry, Sally M., Ekelund, Ulf, Whincup, Peter H., Victor, Christina R., Iliffe, Steve, Ussher, Michael, Fox-Rushby, Julia, Furness, Cheryl, Ibison, Judith, DeWilde, Stephen, Harris, Tess
Předmět:
Zdroj: International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity; 1/22/2019, Vol. 16 Issue 1, pN.PAG-N.PAG, 1p, 3 Charts, 1 Graph
Abstrakt: Background: Few trials have compared estimates of change in physical activity (PA) levels using self-reported and objective PA measures when evaluating trial outcomes. The PACE-UP trial offered the opportunity to assess this, using the self-administered International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) and waist-worn accelerometry. Methods: The PACE-UP trial (N = 1023) compared usual care (n = 338) with two pedometer-based walking interventions, by post (n = 339) or with nurse support (n = 346). Participants wore an accelerometer at baseline and 12 months and completed IPAQ for the same 7-day periods. Main outcomes were weekly minutes, all in ≥10 min bouts as per UK PA guidelines of: i) accelerometer moderate-to-vigorous PA (Acc-MVPA) ii) IPAQ moderate+vigorous PA (IPAQ-MVPA) and iii) IPAQ walking (IPAQ-Walk). For each outcome, 12 month values were regressed on baseline to estimate change. Results: Analyses were restricted to 655 (64%) participants who provided data on all outcomes at baseline and 12 months. Both intervention groups significantly increased their accelerometry MVPA minutes/week compared with control: postal group 42 (95% CI 22, 61), nurse group 43 (95% CI 24, 63). IPAQ-Walk minutes/week also increased: postal 57 (95% CI 2, 112), nurse 43 (95% CI -11, 97) but IPAQ-MVPA minutes/week showed non-significant decreases: postal -11 (95% CI -65, 42), nurse -34 (95% CI -87, 19). Conclusions: Our results demonstrate the necessity of using a questionnaire focussing on the activities being altered, as with IPAQ-Walk questions. Even then, the change in PA was estimated with far less precision than with accelerometry. Accelerometry is preferred to self-report measurement, minimising bias and improving precision when assessing effects of a walking intervention. Trial registration: ISRCTN, ISRCTN98538934. Registered 2 March 2012. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Databáze: Complementary Index
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje