Comparative validity of physical activity measures in older adults.
Comparative validity of physical activity measures in older adults.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1249/mss.0b013e3181fc7162
复制
发表时间：
2011-05
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Schoeller DA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Colbert LH;Matthews CE;Havighurst TC;Kim K;Schoeller DA
在自由生活的老年人中，比较各种身体活动测量与双标记水（DLW）测量的身体活动能量消耗（PAEE）的有效性。五十六名年龄≥65岁的成年人在10天的自由生活期内佩戴三种活动监测仪（新生活方式计步器、ActiGraph加速计和SenseWear（SW）臂带），并完成三项不同的调查（耶鲁体育活动调查（YPAS）、老年人社区健康活动模型计划（CHAMPS）和改良的老年人体育活动量表（modPASE））。总能量消耗采用DLW法测量，静息代谢率采用间接量热法测量，估计食物的热效应，并由此计算PAEE的估计值。评估了各种措施和PAEE之间的线性关联程度，以及PAEE组中的差异，可通过给定的措施进行估计。三种监测指标与PAEE均呈显著相关（r = 0.48-0.60，P < 0.001）。在所有问卷中，只有CHAMPS与PAEE显著相关（r = 0.28，P = 0.04）。相关性的统计学比较表明，该监测仪优于YPAS和modPASE的上级。所有相关性的均方误差都很高，除了YPAS和ActiGraph的回归估计PAEE外，不同工具的中位PAEE与DLW均存在显著差异。在老年人中，客观设备比自我报告的设备更适合对PAEE进行排名，但PAEE的绝对估计并不准确。考虑到成本差异和易用性，当按身体活动水平进行排名时，计步器在这一人群中似乎最有用。
To compare the validity of various physical activity measures with doubly labeled water (DLW)–measured physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) in free-living older adults. Fifty-six adults aged ≥65 yr wore three activity monitors (New Lifestyles pedometer, ActiGraph accelerometer, and a SenseWear (SW) armband) during a 10-d free-living period and completed three different surveys (Yale Physical Activity Survey (YPAS), Community Health Activities Model Program for Seniors (CHAMPS), and a modified Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (modPASE)). Total energy expenditure was measured using DLW, resting metabolic rate was measured with indirect calorimetry, the thermic effect of food was estimated, and from these, estimates of PAEE were calculated. The degree of linear association between the various measures and PAEE was assessed, as were differences in group PAEE, when estimable by a given measure. All three monitors were significantly correlated with PAEE (r = 0.48–0.60, P < 0.001). Of the questionnaires, only CHAMPS was significantly correlated with PAEE (r = 0.28, P = 0.04). Statistical comparison of the correlations suggested that the monitors were superior to YPAS and modPASE. Mean squared errors for all correlations were high, and the median PAEE from the different tools was significantly different from DLW for all but the YPAS and regression-estimated PAEE from the ActiGraph. Objective devices more appropriately rank PAEE than self-reported instruments in older adults, but absolute estimates of PAEE are not accurate. Given the cost differential and ease of use, pedometers seem most useful in this population when ranking by physical activity level is adequate.