Otis R B, Brown A S, Womack C J, Fonong T, Gardner A W
Department of Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, USA.
Angiology. 2000 Mar;51(3):181-8. doi: 10.1177/000331970005100301.
The purposes of this study were to determine the relationship between the physical activity values obtained from the peripheral arterial disease-physical activity recall (PAD-PAR) questionnaire and (1) the free-living daily physical activity obtained from the doubly labeled water technique and (2) clinical measures of PAD severity. Fifty-one older PAD patients (age= 70 +/- 6 years) were recruited from the Vascular Clinic at the Baltimore Veterans Affairs Medical Center and from radio and newspaper advertisements. Energy expenditure of physical activity (EEPA) was determined by using doubly labeled water and indirect calorimetry techniques. PAD severity was measured by ankle/brachial index (ABI) and walking distance to maximal claudication pain determined during a graded treadmill test. In addition, patients were also characterized on body composition and total daily energy expenditure. The physical activity values obtained from the PAD-PAR questionnaire (113 +/- 37 MET-hr/wk) were not related to EEPA (542 +/- 260 kcal/day; r= -0.057, p=0.690), ABI (0.64 +/- 0.19; r=0.032, p=0.826), or distance to maximal claudication pain (376 +/- 229 m; r=-0.054, p=0.731). The authors conclude that the PAD-PAR questionnaire is not an accurate measurement of free-living daily physical activity when compared to EEPA by use of the criterion method of doubly labeled water, and the activity questionnaire measures were poorly correlated with clinical measures of PAD severity.
本研究的目的是确定通过外周动脉疾病-身体活动回忆(PAD-PAR)问卷获得的身体活动值与以下两项的关系:(1)通过双标水技术获得的日常自由生活身体活动;(2)PAD严重程度的临床指标。从巴尔的摩退伍军人事务医疗中心的血管诊所以及广播和报纸广告中招募了51名老年PAD患者(年龄=70±6岁)。使用双标水和间接测热技术确定身体活动的能量消耗(EEPA)。通过踝臂指数(ABI)和在分级跑步机测试期间确定的至最大跛行疼痛的步行距离来测量PAD严重程度。此外,还对患者的身体成分和每日总能量消耗进行了特征描述。从PAD-PAR问卷获得的身体活动值(113±37梅脱-小时/周)与EEPA(542±260千卡/天;r=-0.057,p=0.690)、ABI(0.64±0.19;r=0.032,p=0.826)或至最大跛行疼痛的距离(376±229米;r=-0.054,p=0.731)均无相关性。作者得出结论,与使用双标水的标准方法测量的EEPA相比,PAD-PAR问卷并非对日常自由生活身体活动的准确测量,并且该活动问卷测量结果与PAD严重程度的临床指标相关性较差。