Department of Kinesiology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011 May;43(5):867-76. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181fc7162.
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.
比较在 65 岁以上的老年人中,使用双标水(DLW)测量的体力活动能量消耗(PAEE)与各种体力活动测量方法的有效性。
56 名年龄≥65 岁的成年人在 10 天的自由生活期间佩戴三个活动监测器(New Lifestyles 计步器、ActiGraph 加速度计和 SenseWear(SW)臂带),并完成了三个不同的调查(耶鲁体力活动调查(YPAS)、社区健康活动模型计划为老年人(CHAMPS)和改良的老年人体力活动量表(modPASE))。使用 DLW 测量总能量消耗,使用间接测热法测量静息代谢率,估计食物的热效应,并由此计算 PAEE 的估计值。评估了各种方法与 PAEE 之间的线性关联程度,以及在给定方法可估计的情况下,不同方法的群体 PAEE 之间的差异。
所有三个监测器与 PAEE 均呈显著相关(r=0.48-0.60,P<0.001)。在问卷中,只有 CHAMPS 与 PAEE 呈显著相关(r=0.28,P=0.04)。相关性的统计比较表明,监测器优于 YPAS 和 modPASE。所有相关性的均方误差都很高,除了 YPAS 和 ActiGraph 回归估计的 PAEE 外,所有工具的 PAEE 中位数与 DLW 均有显著差异。
与自我报告的工具相比,客观设备更能恰当地对老年人的 PAEE 进行分级,但 PAEE 的绝对估计值并不准确。鉴于成本差异和易用性,当按体力活动水平进行分级时,计步器似乎在该人群中最有用。