Suppr超能文献

评估脊髓损伤患者能量消耗和身体活动的方法比较。

Comparison of methods to assess energy expenditure and physical activity in people with spinal cord injury.

作者信息

Tanhoffer Ricardo A, Tanhoffer Aldre I P, Raymond Jacqueline, Hills Andrew P, Davis Glen M

机构信息

University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

出版信息

J Spinal Cord Med. 2012 Jan;35(1):35-45. doi: 10.1179/2045772311Y.0000000046.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare different methods of assessing energy expenditure (EE) and physical activity (PA) in people with spinal cord injury (SCI) under community-dwelling conditions.

METHODS

A reference standard encompassing the doubly labelled water (DLW) technique, heart rate monitoring (FLEX-HR), a multi-sensor armband (SenseWear Armband (SWA)), and two PA recall questionnaires were employed in 14 people with SCI to estimate EE and leisure-time PA.

RESULTS

Mean total daily energy expenditure (TDEE) assessed by DLW, FLEX-HR, and SWA were 9817 ± 2491 kJ/day, 8498 ± 1516 kJ/day, and 11414 ± 3242 kJ/day, respectively. Physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) quantified by DLW was 2841 ± 1626 kJ/day, 2935 ± 1732 kJ/day estimated from FLEX-HR, and 2773 ± 2966 kJ/day derived from SWA. After converting the PA recall questionnaire data to EE in kJ/day, PAEE for the Physical Activity Recall Assessment for People with Spinal Cord Injury (PARA-SCI) was 2339 ± 1171 kJ/day and for Physical Activity Scale for Individuals with Physical Disabilities (PASIPD) 749 ± 1026 kJ/day. DLW-quantified PAEE was moderately associated with PARA-SCI (R(2) = 0.62, P < 0.05), but not with the other estimates of PAEE (R(2) ranged between 0.13 and 0.30, P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed that the PARA-SCI recall questionnaire was the best estimate of PAEE compared to the reference standard DLW approach. Although the between-method variability for SWA, FLEX-HR, and PASIPD-derived PAEE was small, there was a weak association between these methods and the criterion DLW technique. The best estimate of DLW-quantified TDEE was by FLEX-HR. SWA significantly overestimated TDEE in this population.

摘要

目的

比较在社区居住条件下评估脊髓损伤(SCI)患者能量消耗(EE)和身体活动(PA)的不同方法。

方法

采用包括双标水(DLW)技术、心率监测(FLEX-HR)、多传感器臂带(SenseWear臂带(SWA))以及两份PA回忆问卷的参考标准,对14名SCI患者的EE和休闲时间PA进行评估。

结果

通过DLW、FLEX-HR和SWA评估的平均每日总能量消耗(TDEE)分别为9817±2491千焦/天、8498±1516千焦/天和11414±3242千焦/天。通过DLW量化的身体活动能量消耗(PAEE)为2841±1626千焦/天,通过FLEX-HR估计为2935±1732千焦/天,通过SWA得出为2773±2966千焦/天。将PA回忆问卷数据转换为以千焦/天为单位的EE后,脊髓损伤患者身体活动回忆评估(PARA-SCI)的PAEE为2339±1171千焦/天,身体残疾个体身体活动量表(PASIPD)的PAEE为749±1026千焦/天。DLW量化的PAEE与PARA-SCI中度相关(R² = 0.62,P < 0.05),但与其他PAEE估计值无关(R²在0.13至0.30之间,P > 0.05)。

结论

我们的研究结果表明,与参考标准DLW方法相比,PARA-SCI回忆问卷是对PAEE的最佳估计。虽然SWA、FLEX-HR和PASIPD得出的PAEE的方法间变异性较小,但这些方法与标准DLW技术之间的关联较弱。DLW量化的TDEE的最佳估计值来自FLEX-HR。SWA在该人群中显著高估了TDEE。

相似文献

9
Evaluation of methods to assess physical activity in free-living conditions.评估自由生活条件下身体活动的方法
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001 Jul;33(7):1233-40. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200107000-00024.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

5
Validation of the SenseWear Pro Armband algorithms in children.儿童中SenseWear Pro臂带算法的验证
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009 Sep;41(9):1714-20. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181a071cf.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验