University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Research Institute for Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, UK.
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2019 Feb;71(2):237-251. doi: 10.1002/acr.23787.
To identify and evaluate the measurement properties of self-report physical activity instruments suitable for patients with osteoarthritis (OA).
We conducted a comprehensive 2-stage systematic review using multiple electronic databases, from inception until July 2018. In the stage 1 review, we sought to identify all self-report physical activity instruments used in individuals with joint pain attributable to OA in the foot, knee, hip, or hand. In the stage 2 review, we searched for and appraised studies investigating the measurement properties of the instruments identified. In both stages of the review, we screened all articles for study eligibility criteria, completed data extraction using the Qualitative Attributes and Measurement Properties of Physical Activity questionnaire checklist, and conducted methodology quality assessments using a modified COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments) checklist. Measurement properties for each physical activity instrument were evaluated and combined, using narrative synthesis.
In the stage 1 review, we identified 23 unique self-report physical activity instruments. In the stage 2 review, we identified 54 studies that evaluated the measurement properties of 13 of the 23 instruments identified. Instrument reliability varied from inadequate to adequate (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.7). Instrument construct and criterion validity assessment showed small to moderate correlations with direct measures of physical activity. Instrument responsiveness was assessed in only 1 instrument and was unable to detect changes in comparison to accelerometers.
Although many instruments were identified as being potentially suitable for use in patients with OA, none demonstrated adequate measurement properties across all domains of reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Further high-quality assessment of self-report physical activity instruments is required before such measures can be recommended for use in OA research.
确定并评估适合骨关节炎（OA）患者的自我报告体力活动仪器的测量特性。
我们使用多个电子数据库进行了全面的 2 阶段系统评价，时间从创建数据库开始到 2018 年 7 月。在第 1 阶段的评价中，我们试图确定所有用于足部、膝部、髋部或手部关节疼痛归因于 OA 的个体的自我报告体力活动仪器。在第 2 阶段的评价中，我们搜索并评估了确定仪器的测量特性的研究。在评价的两个阶段中，我们都根据研究合格标准筛选所有文章，使用定性属性和体力活动问卷检查表进行数据提取，并使用改良的 COSMIN（健康测量工具选择共识标准）检查表进行方法质量评估。使用叙述性综合法评估每个体力活动仪器的测量特性并进行综合。
在第 1 阶段的评价中，我们确定了 23 种独特的自我报告体力活动仪器。在第 2 阶段的评价中，我们确定了 54 项研究，评估了这 23 种仪器中的 13 种仪器的测量特性。仪器可靠性从不足到充足（组内相关系数≥0.7）。仪器结构和标准有效性评估显示与体力活动的直接测量有小到中度的相关性。仅在 1 个仪器中评估了仪器的反应性，并且无法与加速度计相比检测到变化。
尽管确定了许多可能适用于 OA 患者的仪器，但在可靠性、有效性和反应性的所有领域都没有一个仪器表现出足够的测量特性。在推荐这些措施用于 OA 研究之前，需要进一步对自我报告体力活动仪器进行高质量评估。
