PURPOSE: Given the importance of physical activity (PA) in cardiac rehabilitation and prevention, measuring it in a valid and reliable manner is a practical challenge. Measuring self-reported PA in elderly cardiac patients can be problematic because of the need to assess many activities of short duration that may occur as part of routine daily functions. The primary purpose of this article was to identify and evaluate instruments that have been used over the last 15 years in studies of cardiac patients. METHODS: A comprehensive MEDLINE search was carried out to identify articles from studies undertaken to assess PA in cardiac patients. The self-report PA instruments were subjected to evaluation concerning suitability for use with cardiac patients. RESULTS: The initial electronic and hand searches yielded 203 articles. After removing articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, a total of 86 articles were selected. Twenty-three self-report instruments were identified for evaluation. Most of the instruments had problems associated with inadequate validation methods or suitability for cardiac patients. Many of the instruments failed to demonstrate adequate validity or reliability, particularly when measuring low-intensity PA. CONCLUSIONS: Some instruments are more suited to epidemiologic research than to clinical interventions where responsiveness to interventions is crucial. Recommendations for the constituents of an acceptable self-report PA instrument for cardiac patients are presented and the most suitable existing instruments are identified.
PURPOSE: Given the importance of physical activity (PA) in cardiac rehabilitation and prevention, measuring it in a valid and reliable manner is a practical challenge. Measuring self-reported PA in elderly cardiac patients can be problematic because of the need to assess many activities of short duration that may occur as part of routine daily functions. The primary purpose of this article was to identify and evaluate instruments that have been used over the last 15 years in studies of cardiac patients. METHODS: A comprehensive MEDLINE search was carried out to identify articles from studies undertaken to assess PA in cardiac patients. The self-report PA instruments were subjected to evaluation concerning suitability for use with cardiac patients. RESULTS: The initial electronic and hand searches yielded 203 articles. After removing articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, a total of 86 articles were selected. Twenty-three self-report instruments were identified for evaluation. Most of the instruments had problems associated with inadequate validation methods or suitability for cardiac patients. Many of the instruments failed to demonstrate adequate validity or reliability, particularly when measuring low-intensity PA. CONCLUSIONS: Some instruments are more suited to epidemiologic research than to clinical interventions where responsiveness to interventions is crucial. Recommendations for the constituents of an acceptable self-report PA instrument for cardiac patients are presented and the most suitable existing instruments are identified.
Authors: A Tanriverdi; B Ozcan Kahraman; I Ozsoy; F Bayraktar; B Ozgen Saydam; S Acar; E Ozpelit; B Akdeniz; S Savci Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2018-11-19 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: H Myrthe Boss; Yolanda van der Graaf; Frank L J Visseren; Renske M Van den Berg-Vos; Michiel L Bots; Gert Jan de Borst; Maarten J Cramer; L Jaap Kappelle; Mirjam I Geerlings Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-07-23 Impact factor: 5.501