Validity of the Exercise Vital Sign Tool to Assess Physical Activity.
Validity of the Exercise Vital Sign Tool to Assess Physical Activity.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.amepre.2021.01.012
复制
发表时间：
2021-06
影响因子：
5.5
通讯作者：
Fortmann SP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kuntz JL;Young DR;Saelens BE;Frank LD;Meenan RT;Dickerson JF;Keast EM;Fortmann SP
医疗保健提供者的评估和咨询可以成功地增加身体活动（PA）;然而，需要一种有效的工具来有效地测量PA。本研究通过比较在Kaiser Permanente Northwest收集的EVS数据与加速度计数据来检验运动生命体征（EVS）工具的有效性。参与者（n=521）完成了加速计监测，并且在其电子病历中有≥1个EVS测量值。使用加速度计作为“金标准”，使用斯皮尔曼相关系数检查通过EVS和加速度计估计的中度至剧烈PA（MVPA）分钟/周之间的关联。使用简单和加权κ统计量评估MVPA类别（非活动性、低活动性、中度活动性、充分活动性）的可比性。计算敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值。该研究于2012-2015年进行，并于2019-2020年进行分析。基于加速度计的平均MVPA为212分钟/周，57%的人被认为足够活跃。基于EVS的MVPA平均为170分钟/周，53%的人处于活跃状态。通过EVS和加速度计报告的MVPA分钟/周之间呈正相关（r =0.38，p<0.0001）。在基于EVS和基于加速度计的MVPA类别之间观察到了相当的一致性（加权κ=0.29），其中≥150分钟/周的MVPA类别的一致性最高。当MVPA分为两组（<150或≥150 min/周，κ=0.34）时，正相关性增加。EVS的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值（与加速度计相比）分别为67%、68%、61%和73%。EVS是一个有用的PA评估工具，可以正确识别大多数符合和不符合PA指南的成年人。
Assessment and counseling by healthcare providers can successfully increase physical activity (PA); however, a valid instrument to effectively measure PA is needed. This study examines the validity of the Exercise Vital Sign (EVS) tool by comparing EVS data collected at Kaiser Permanente Northwest to accelerometry data. Participants (n=521) completed accelerometer monitoring and had ≥1 EVS measurement in their electronic medical record. Using accelerometry as the “gold standard,” the association between moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) minutes/week estimated through EVS and accelerometry was examined using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Comparability of MVPA categories (inactive, low active, moderately active, sufficiently active) was assessed using simple and weighted κ statistics. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value were calculated. The study was conducted in 2012–2015, with analysis in 2019–2020. Average accelerometry-based MVPA was 212 minutes/week and 57% were considered sufficiently active. EVS-based MVPA averaged 170 minutes/week and 53% were active. There was a positive correlation between MVPA minutes/week reported through EVS and accelerometry (r =0.38, p<0.0001). Fair agreement was observed between EVS- and accelerometry-based MVPA categories (weighted κ=0.29), with the highest agreement occurring for those with ≥150 minutes/week. The positive correlation increased when MVPA was examined dichotomously (<150 or ≥150 minutes/week, κ=0.34). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for EVS (when compared with accelerometry) were 67%, 68%, 61%, and 73%, respectively. The EVS is a useful PA assessment tool that correctly identifies the majority of adults who do and do not meet PA guidelines.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Frank, Lawrence D.;Kuntz, Jennifer L.;Fortmann, Stephen P.
通讯作者：
Fortmann, Stephen P.
DOI：
10.1249/mss.0000000000000565
发表时间：
2015-07-01
期刊：
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE
影响因子：
--
作者：
Fitzgerald, Liam;Ozemek, Cemal;Kaminsky, Leonard A.
通讯作者：
Kaminsky, Leonard A.
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Cleland CL;Hunter RF;Kee F;Cupples ME;Sallis JF;Tully MA
通讯作者：
Tully MA
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
Ainsworth BE;Caspersen CJ;Matthews CE;Mâsse LC;Baranowski T;Zhu W
通讯作者：
Zhu W
影响因子：
3.7
作者：
Grandes, Gonzalo;Sanchez, Alvaro;Torcal, Jesus
通讯作者：
Torcal, Jesus