Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 11, 2025
05:59
Visualization of Intensity Levels to Reduce the Gap Between Self-Reported and Directly Measured Physical Activity
Published on: March 7, 2019
6.8K
Responsiveness of Patient-Reported and Device-Based Physical Activity Measures: Secondary Analysis of Four Randomized
Jennifer N Baldwin, Jialan He, Juliana S Oliveira
1Health Promotion Service, Illawarra Shoalhaven Local Health District, Wollongong, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
|November 14, 2023
Summary
Device-based instruments and the Incidental and Planned Exercise Questionnaire (IPEQ) both detect physical activity changes. Responsiveness varies by intervention and population, guiding instrument selection for researchers and clinicians.
Area of Science:
- Gerontology
- Rehabilitation Medicine
- Biomedical Engineering
Background:
- Accurate measurement of physical activity is crucial for evaluating interventions in diverse populations.
- Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and device-based instruments offer different approaches to assessing physical activity.
- Understanding the comparative responsiveness of these instruments is essential for effective research design.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the responsiveness of the Incidental and Planned Exercise Questionnaire (IPEQ), a patient-reported outcome measure, against device-based instruments (ActiGraph, ActivPAL) in measuring physical activity.
- To analyze responsiveness across four distinct physical activity intervention trials involving different age groups and health statuses.
- To provide evidence-based guidance for selecting appropriate physical activity measurement tools.
Main Methods:
- Secondary analysis of four randomized controlled trials (AMOUNT, Balance Exercise Strength Training at Home, CHAnGE, Fitbit trial).
- Utilized both the Incidental and Planned Exercise Questionnaire (IPEQ) and device-based instruments (ActiGraph or ActivPAL) to capture physical activity data.
- Estimated treatment effects as effect sizes (ES) using regression analyses to compare instrument responsiveness.
Main Results:
- Device-based instruments demonstrated higher responsiveness in healthy older adults (ES range: 0.01–0.32).
- The IPEQ showed greater responsiveness in adults undergoing rehabilitation (ES range: -0.06–0.35).
- Both measurement types were more responsive in trials promoting walking, indicating effectiveness in interventions targeting increased daily steps.
Conclusions:
- Both the IPEQ and device-based instruments can detect subtle changes in physical activity.
- The choice of instrument impacts responsiveness, influenced by the specific intervention and participant population.
- Findings aid researchers and clinicians in selecting the most suitable instrument for measuring physical activity changes.
