Jolene A Butler1, Terrya Miller2, Susan O'Connell1, Christine Jelinek1, Eileen G Collins3. 1. Research & Development, Edward Hines, Jr., VA Hospital, Hines, IL. 2. Research & Development, Edward Hines, Jr., VA Hospital, Hines, IL ; Resurrection Medical Center, Chicago, IL. 3. Research & Development, Edward Hines, Jr., VA Hospital, Hines, IL ; College of Nursing, University of Illinois at Chicago.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To test the reliability and validity of a physical activity instrument adapted for individuals with spinal cord injuries (SCI), the Physical Activity Instrument-SCI (PAI-SCI). METHODS: Eligible participants completed the adapted PAI-SCI questionnaire at baseline and 1 week later. At baseline, they were also given an Actical accelerometer to wear on their wrist for 1 week. RESULTS: Forty-three male subjects completed the study. There was a moderate relationship between total score on the PAI-SCI and total activity count determined by accelerometry (r = 0.42, P = 0.036). The PAI-SCI was able to differentiate between people with upper and lower level injuries (P = 0.05). Test-retest reliability was supported for the exercise and the general activity/self care subscales and not supported for the light household or the outdoor/gardening subscales. CONCLUSION: The PAI-SCI was able to distinguish between physical activity amongst those with upper level and lower level injuries. More research is needed before the PAI-SCI can be recommended for use in clinical trials.
OBJECTIVES: To test the reliability and validity of a physical activity instrument adapted for individuals with spinal cord injuries (SCI), the Physical Activity Instrument-SCI (PAI-SCI). METHODS: Eligible participants completed the adapted PAI-SCI questionnaire at baseline and 1 week later. At baseline, they were also given an Actical accelerometer to wear on their wrist for 1 week. RESULTS: Forty-three male subjects completed the study. There was a moderate relationship between total score on the PAI-SCI and total activity count determined by accelerometry (r = 0.42, P = 0.036). The PAI-SCI was able to differentiate between people with upper and lower level injuries (P = 0.05). Test-retest reliability was supported for the exercise and the general activity/self care subscales and not supported for the light household or the outdoor/gardening subscales. CONCLUSION: The PAI-SCI was able to distinguish between physical activity amongst those with upper level and lower level injuries. More research is needed before the PAI-SCI can be recommended for use in clinical trials.
Authors: J F Sallis; W L Haskell; P D Wood; S P Fortmann; T Rogers; S N Blair; R S Paffenbarger Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1985-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Richard A Washburn; Weimo Zhu; Edward McAuley; Michael Frogley; Stephen F Figoni Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 3.966