Guo Xiang, Mao Hongmei, Liu Tingting, Zhang Yu, Shen Peng, Xie Danyuan, Zhang Xueli, Zhuo Qin
National Institute for Nutrition and Health, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 102206, China.
Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2021 May;50(3):435-441. doi: 10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2021.03.015.
Based on the accelerometer, the validity of the international physical activity questionnaire long version(IPAQ-L) and Bouchard diary were evaluated to measure the daily physical activity of Chinese adults aged 18-59 years old.
A total of 200 Chinese adults were recruited in Yinzhou District of Ningbo City in 2019, including 78 males and 122 females, the three age groups 18-29, 30-49, 50 and above accounted for 19. 5%, 61. 5% and 18. 0%, respectively. The volunteers wore Actigraph WGT3 x-BT three-dimensional accelerometer for 3 days, and completed the 3 consecutive days& apos; Bouchard diary and the IPAQ-L. The physical activity energy expenditure(PAEE), sedentary inactivity time, light physical activity time(LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity time(MVPA) measured by the three tools were estimated respectively. Spearman analysis was used to analyze the correlation, the Friedman test and the Bland-Altman plot were used to test the homogeneity of the three method.
196 volunteers were included in this study. The correlation coefficients of PAEE between IPAQ and diary and accelerometer were 0. 32 and 0. 58, respectively, the correlation coefficients of sedentary behavior were 0. 17, 0. 25, and LPA time was 0. 33, and the estimated IPAQ for MVPA time better than diary. The difference test result showed that, except for IPAQ in the measurement of MVPA, there was no statistical difference from the accelerometer measurement result(P=0. 684), and the difference between other estimated values and the accelerometer measurement result was statistically significant(P& lt; 0. 01), Bland-Altman plot result showed that the diary and IPAQ had good consistency in the measurement of PAEE and IPAQ in the estimation of MVPA time, but there was an overestimation in PAEE. In addition, IPAQ had poor validity in measuring sedentary behavior and LPA.
IPAQ and Bouchard diary have better validity in evaluating PAEE, and the diary is better than IPAQ. IPAQ has better validity in evaluating MVPA time, but has poor validity in estimating sedentary behavior and LPA time.
基于加速度计，评估国际体力活动问卷长版（IPAQ-L）和布沙尔日记在测量18 - 59岁中国成年人日常体力活动方面的有效性。
2019年在宁波市鄞州区招募了200名中国成年人，其中男性78名，女性122名，三个年龄组18 - 29岁、30 - 49岁、50岁及以上分别占19.5%、61.5%和18.0%。志愿者佩戴Actigraph WGT3 x - BT三维加速度计3天，并连续3天完成布沙尔日记和IPAQ-L。分别估算三种工具测量的体力活动能量消耗（PAEE）、久坐不动时间、轻度体力活动时间（LPA）和中等到剧烈体力活动时间（MVPA）。采用Spearman分析相关性，Friedman检验和Bland - Altman图检验三种方法的同质性。
本研究纳入196名志愿者。IPAQ与日记和加速度计之间PAEE的相关系数分别为0.32和0.58，久坐行为的相关系数分别为0.17、0.25，LPA时间的相关系数为0.33，IPAQ对MVPA时间的估计优于日记。差异检验结果显示，除IPAQ在测量MVPA时与加速度计测量结果无统计学差异（P = 0.684）外，其他估计值与加速度计测量结果的差异具有统计学意义（P < 0.01），Bland - Altman图结果显示，日记和IPAQ在测量PAEE以及IPAQ在估计MVPA时间方面具有良好的一致性，但在PAEE方面存在高估。此外，IPAQ在测量久坐行为和LPA方面有效性较差。
IPAQ和布沙尔日记在评估PAEE方面具有较好的有效性，且日记优于IPAQ。IPAQ在评估MVPA时间方面具有较好的有效性，但在估计久坐行为和LPA时间方面有效性较差。
