Why the study?
Reliable and valid questionnaires are crucial because data on physical activity and sedentary time in post-MI patients are often self-reported in clinical practice.
Are the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and SWEDEHEART questionnaires reliable and valid for assessing physical activity and sedentary time in patients with myocardial infarction?
Population
57 patients after myocardial infarction
Design
Multi-centre validation study
Follow-up
Seven days
Key result
Physical activity questionnaires showed moderate test-retest reliability (k=0.43-0.54) and fair criterion validity (r=0.41-0.50) against accelerometry in patients with myocardial infarction.
Authors
Loading...
Supports use of NBHW questionnaires for post-MI PA/SED monitoring; extends validation evidence in cardiac rehabilitation.
Observational (n=57)
Yes
Are the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and SWEDEHEART questionnaires reliable and valid for assessing physical activity and sedentary time in patients with myocardial infarction?
Effect estimate: k = 0.43-0.54 (test-retest PA); r = 0.41-0.50 (criterion PA)
The studied physical activity questionnaires have moderate reliability and fair validity for screening post-MI patients, but the sedentary time questionnaire performs poorly and requires further development.
Bargholtz et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Myocardial Infarction (n=57). Physical activity and sedentary time questionnaires vs. Accelerometer (for criterion validity) was evaluated on Test-retest reliability and criterion validity (k = 0.43-0.54 (test-retest PA); r = 0.41-0.50 (criterion PA)). Physical activity questionnaires showed moderate test-retest reliability (k=0.43-0.54) and fair criterion validity (r=0.41-0.50) against accelerometry in patients with myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: