Şeyma Toy1, Rukiye Çiftçi2, Deniz Şenol3, Fatma Kizilay4, Hilal Ermiş5. 1. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Karabük University, Karabük, Turkey. 2. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Inönü University, Malatya, Turkey. 3. Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Düzce University, Düzce, Turkey. 4. Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Malatya, Turkey. 5. Department of Chest Diseases, Faculty of Medicine, Inönü University, Malatya, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the physical activity, kinesiophobia, and fatigue levels of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) patients and healthy individuals in terms their somatotypes. METHODS: A total of 165 individuals were enrolled referred to the Department of Chest Diseases Sleep Disorders Center Outpatient Clinic of Inonu University, Malatya, Turkey in 2018. The somatotype analysis was conducted using the Heath-Carter method, the fatigue level was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) fatigue scale, the kinesiophobia level was assessed using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), and the physical activity level was assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). RESULTS: The results of the somatotype analysis revealed 3 different somatotypes in the healthy individuals and the OSAS patients' mesomorph endomorph, endomorphic mesomorph, and mesomorphic endomorph. When comparing the somatotypes of the healthy individuals and the OSAS patients, statistically significant differences were found in the FACIT scores of the mesomorph endomorphs, the IPAQ and FACIT scores of the endomorphic mesomorphs, and the TSK and FACIT scores of the mesomorphic endomorphs (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: In all three somatotypes of the OSAS patients, the fatigue index scores were higher when compared to those of the healthy individuals. Moreover, when compared with the healthy individuals, the physical activity levels of the endomorphic mesomorphs with OSAS were low, while the kinesiophobia scores of the mesomorphic endomorphs with OSAS were high. Based on the results of this study, in OSAS patients, the endomorphic mesomorph somatotype could be a risk factor for reduced physical activity, while the mesomorphic endomorph somatotype could be a risk factor for increased kinesiophobia.
BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the physical activity, kinesiophobia, and fatigue levels of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) patients and healthy individuals in terms their somatotypes. METHODS: A total of 165 individuals were enrolled referred to the Department of Chest Diseases Sleep Disorders Center Outpatient Clinic of Inonu University, Malatya, Turkey in 2018. The somatotype analysis was conducted using the Heath-Carter method, the fatigue level was assessed using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) fatigue scale, the kinesiophobia level was assessed using the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), and the physical activity level was assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ). RESULTS: The results of the somatotype analysis revealed 3 different somatotypes in the healthy individuals and the OSAS patients' mesomorph endomorph, endomorphic mesomorph, and mesomorphic endomorph. When comparing the somatotypes of the healthy individuals and the OSAS patients, statistically significant differences were found in the FACIT scores of the mesomorph endomorphs, the IPAQ and FACIT scores of the endomorphic mesomorphs, and the TSK and FACIT scores of the mesomorphic endomorphs (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: In all three somatotypes of the OSAS patients, the fatigue index scores were higher when compared to those of the healthy individuals. Moreover, when compared with the healthy individuals, the physical activity levels of the endomorphic mesomorphs with OSAS were low, while the kinesiophobia scores of the mesomorphic endomorphs with OSAS were high. Based on the results of this study, in OSAS patients, the endomorphic mesomorph somatotype could be a risk factor for reduced physical activity, while the mesomorphic endomorph somatotype could be a risk factor for increased kinesiophobia.
Authors: B E Ainsworth; W L Haskell; M C Whitt; M L Irwin; A M Swartz; S J Strath; W L O'Brien; D R Bassett; K H Schmitz; P O Emplaincourt; D R Jacobs; A S Leon Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Manisha Jhamb; Kelly Liang; Jonathan Yabes; Jennifer L Steel; Mary Amanda Dew; Nirav Shah; Mark Unruh Journal: Am J Nephrol Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 3.754
Authors: A N Vgontzas; D A Papanicolaou; E O Bixler; K Hopper; A Lotsikas; H M Lin; A Kales; G P Chrousos Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Luiz Bittencourt Mercanti; Marcio L de S Bezerra; José Fernandes Filho; Claudio José Struchiner Journal: Arq Neuropsiquiatr Date: 2004-10-05 Impact factor: 1.420