A pilot study: Validity and reliability of the CSEP-PATH PASB-Q and a new leisure time physical activity questionnaire to assess physical activity and sedentary behaviours
A pilot study: Validity and reliability of the CSEP-PATH PASB-Q and a new leisure time physical activity questionnaire to assess physical activity and sedentary behaviours
复制标题
DOI：
10.1139/apnm-2016-0412
复制
发表时间：
2017-06-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Shields, Christopher A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Fowles, Jonathon R.;O'Brien, Myles W.;Shields, Christopher A.
本研究的目的是评估两个新开发的身体活动问卷的准确性：加拿大运动生理学学会（CSEP）的身体活动和久坐行为问卷（PASB-Q）和新修改的休闲时间身体活动问卷（mLTPA-Q）。这些问卷调查进行了比较，身体活动和健身（加速度计和生理评估）在35名成年人，一周的日常生活活动之前和之后的客观测量。客观测量的中等强度至高强度有氧运动（MVPA）与PASB-Q的身体活动生命体征（PAVS）（r = 0.50，p = 0.004）和mLTPA-Q（r = 0.56，p = 0.001）中度相关。Bland-Altman图表明MVPA的自报与客观测量之间的偏倚极小。PAVS准确区分谁达到和没有达到加拿大体力活动指南的能力分别为83%和60%，而mLTPA-Q分别为82%和73%。与客观测量相比，PASB-Q中自我报告的久坐时间被大大低估（6.4 +/- 3.5 vs 12.2 +/- 1.2 h/天）。本研究的结果表明，PASB-Q和mLTPA-Q是有效和可靠的成年人体力活动的措施，并提供合理的指示，这些人谁符合体力活动指南。未来的问卷编制应考虑到对久坐活动时间的低估。
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 2 newly developed physical activity questionnaires: the Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP) Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire (PASB-Q) and a newly modified Leisure-Time Physical Activity Questionnaire (mLTPA-Q). These questionnaires were compared with objective measurements of physical activity and fitness (accelerometry and physiological assessments) in 35 adults, before and after a week of daily living activity. Objectively measured moderate-to vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity (MVPA) was moderately correlated with the PASB-Q's physical activity vital sign (PAVS) (r = 0.50, p = 0.004) and the mLTPA-Q (r = 0.56, p = 0.001). Bland-Altman plots suggest minimal bias from self-reported to objective measures of MVPA. The ability of PAVS to accurately distinguish who does and does not achieve Canadian physical activity guidelines was 83% and 60%, respectively, compared with 82% and 73% of the mLTPA-Q. Self-reported sedentary time was greatly underestimated in the PASB-Q compared with the objective measure (6.4 +/- 3.5 vs 12.2 +/- 1.2 h/day). The results of this study suggest the PASB-Q and mLTPA-Q are valid and reliable measures of adult physical activity and provide reasonable indication of those individuals who meet physical activity guidelines. Future questionnaire development should take into account the underestimation of time spent engaging in sedentary activities.