探索感染艾滋病毒者的身体功能、功能性运动能力和运动自我效能之间的相互关系。
Exploring the Interrelationships Between Physical Function, Functional Exercise Capacity, and Exercise Self-Efficacy in Persons Living with HIV.
作者信息
Nokes Kathleen M, Sokhela Dudu G, Orton Penelope M, Samuels William Ellery, Phillips J Craig, Tufts Kimberly Adams, Perazzo Joseph D, Chaiphibalsarisdi Puangtip, Portillo Carmen, Schnall Rebecca, Hamilton Mary Jane, Dawson-Rose Carol, Webel Allison R
机构信息
International Nursing Network for HIV Research, Durban University of Technology, South Africa.
Department of Nursing, Durban University of Technology, South Africa.
出版信息
Clin Nurs Res. 2024 Mar;33(2-3):165-175. doi: 10.1177/10547738241231626. Epub 2024 Feb 16.
PURPOSE
To determine if there were differences between the subjective and objective assessments of physical activity while controlling for sociodemographic, anthropometric, and clinical characteristics.
SETTING/SAMPLE: A total of 810 participants across eight sites located in three countries.
MEASURES
Subjective instruments were the two subscales of Self-efficacy for Exercise Behaviors Scale: Making Time for Exercise and Resisting Relapse and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, which measured physical function. The objective measure of functional exercise capacity was the 6-minute Walk Test.
ANALYSIS
Both univariate and multivariant analyses were used.
RESULTS
Physical function was significantly associated with Making Time for Exercise (β = 1.76, = .039) but not with Resisting Relapse (β = 1.16, = .168). Age (β = -1.88, = .001), being employed (β = 16.19, < .001) and race (βs = 13.84-31.98, < .001), hip-waist ratio (β = -2.18, < .001), and comorbidities (β = 7.31, < .001) were significant predictors of physical functioning. The model predicting physical function accounted for a large amount of variance (adjusted = .938). The patterns of results predicting functional exercise capacity were similar. Making Time for Exercise self-efficacy scores significantly predicted functional exercise capacity (β = 0.14, = .029), and Resisting Relapse scores again did not (β = -0.10, = .120). Among the covariates, age (β = -0.16, < .001), gender (β = -0.43, < .001), education (β = 0.08, = .026), and hip-waist ratio (β = 0.09, = .034) were significant. This model did not account for much of the overall variance in the data (adjusted = .081). We found a modest significant relationship between physical function and functional exercise capacity ( = 0.27).
CONCLUSIONS
Making Time for Exercise Self-efficacy was more significant than Resisting Relapse for both physical function and functional exercise capacity. Interventions to promote achievement of physical activity need to use multiple measurement strategies.
目的
在控制社会人口统计学、人体测量学和临床特征的同时，确定身体活动的主观评估与客观评估之间是否存在差异。
设置/样本：来自三个国家八个地点的810名参与者。
测量方法
主观工具为运动行为自我效能量表的两个子量表：为运动腾出时间和抵制复发，以及患者报告结局测量信息系统，用于测量身体功能。功能性运动能力的客观测量方法是6分钟步行试验。
分析
采用单变量和多变量分析。
结果
身体功能与为运动腾出时间显著相关（β = 1.76，P = 0.039），但与抵制复发无关（β = 1.16，P = 0.168）。年龄（β = -1.88，P = 0.001）、就业情况（β = 16.19，P < 0.001）、种族（β值 = 13.84 - 31.98，P < 0.001）、腰臀比（β = -2.18，P < 0.001）和合并症（β = 7.31，P < 0.001）是身体功能的显著预测因素。预测身体功能的模型解释了大量的方差（调整后R² = 0.938）。预测功能性运动能力的结果模式相似。为运动腾出时间的自我效能量表得分显著预测了功能性运动能力（β = 0.14，P = 0.029），而抵制复发得分则不然（β = -0.10，P = 0.120）。在协变量中，年龄（β = -0.16，P < 0.001）、性别（β = -0.43，P < 0.001）、教育程度（β = 0.08，P = 0.026）和腰臀比（β = 0.09，P = 0.034）具有显著性。该模型并未解释数据中的大部分总体方差（调整后R² = 0.081）。我们发现身体功能与功能性运动能力之间存在适度的显著关系（R = 0.27）。
结论
对于身体功能和功能性运动能力而言，为运动腾出时间的自我效能比抵制复发更为显著。促进身体活动实现的干预措施需要使用多种测量策略。
Zotero 插件