Key result
Only 4 subjective physical activity measures show established reliability and moderate validity in heart disease.
Why the study?
Daily physical activity measurement is important for prognosis in heart disease and more feasible with subjective measures, but reliable and valid instruments needed identification.
Which subjective measures of daily physical activity have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease?
Systematic Review
Which subjective measures of daily physical activity have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease?
This review identifies four subjective physical activity questionnaires with established reliability and validity for use in patients with heart disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Subjective PA measures in heart disease warrant clinical caution due to moderate validity; extends evidence by identifying only four adequately validated options.
BACKGROUND: The measurement of daily physical activity (DPA) is important for the prognosis and quantifying clinical outcomes in individuals with heart disease. The measurement of DPA is more feasible using subjective measures when compared with objective measures. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to identify the subjective measures of DPA that have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease to assist clinician and researcher instrument selection. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases was performed. Methodological rigor was assessed using 3 different quality appraisal tools. Qualitative synthesis of included studies was performed. RESULTS: Twenty-two unique studies covering 19 subjective DPA measures were ultimately included. Methodological rigor was generally fair, and validity coefficients were moderate at best. CONCLUSIONS: Only 4 subjective measures that have established test-retest reliability and that provide an estimate of energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents, or minutes of DPA were compared against accelerometry or a DPA diary in patients with heart disease: SWISS Physical Activity Questionnaire, Total Activity Measure 1 and 2, and Mobile Physical Activity Logger. Depending on the clinician or researcher needs, instrument selection would depend on the recall period and the DPA construct being measured.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shoemaker et al. (2021) conducted a systematic review in Heart disease. Subjective daily physical activity (DPA) measures vs. Objective measures (accelerometry, DPA diary, cardiopulmonary exercise testing) was evaluated on Validity and reliability of subjective DPA measures. Only four subjective measures of daily physical activity (SWISSPAQ, TAM1, TAM2, and MobilePAL) have established test-retest reliability and have been validated against accelerometry or a daily physical activity diary in patients with heart disease, though validity coefficients were moderate at best.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: