Shoemaker Michael J, Mattern Michaela, Scholten Hannah, Zeitler Jessica, Gore Shweta
J Phys Act Health. 2021 Mar 5;18(4):450-460. doi: 10.1123/jpah.2020-0661. Print 2021 Apr 1.
The measurement of daily physical activity (DPA) is important for the prognosis and quantifying clinical outcomes in individuals with heart disease. The measurement of DPA is more feasible using subjective measures when compared with objective measures. The purpose of this systematic review of the literature was to identify the subjective measures of DPA that have established reliability and validity in individuals with heart disease to assist clinician and researcher instrument selection.
A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and ProQuest databases was performed. Methodological rigor was assessed using 3 different quality appraisal tools. Qualitative synthesis of included studies was performed.
Twenty-two unique studies covering 19 subjective DPA measures were ultimately included. Methodological rigor was generally fair, and validity coefficients were moderate at best.
Only 4 subjective measures that have established test-retest reliability and that provide an estimate of energy expenditure, metabolic equivalents, or minutes of DPA were compared against accelerometry or a DPA diary in patients with heart disease: SWISS Physical Activity Questionnaire, Total Activity Measure 1 and 2, and Mobile Physical Activity Logger. Depending on the clinician or researcher needs, instrument selection would depend on the recall period and the DPA construct being measured.
日常身体活动（DPA）的测量对于心脏病患者的预后评估和临床结局量化至关重要。与客观测量方法相比，使用主观测量方法来测量DPA更为可行。本系统文献综述的目的是确定在心脏病患者中已确立可靠性和有效性的DPA主观测量方法，以协助临床医生和研究人员选择测量工具。
对PubMed、CINAHL、MEDLINE和ProQuest数据库进行了系统检索。使用3种不同的质量评估工具对方法的严谨性进行评估。对纳入研究进行定性综合分析。
最终纳入了22项涵盖19种主观DPA测量方法的独特研究。方法的严谨性总体一般，效度系数充其量为中等。
在心脏病患者中，只有4种已确立重测信度且能提供能量消耗、代谢当量或DPA分钟数估计值的主观测量方法与加速度计或DPA日记进行了比较：瑞士身体活动问卷、总活动量测量法1和2以及移动身体活动记录器。根据临床医生或研究人员的需求，测量工具的选择将取决于回忆期和所测量的DPA结构。
