» Articles » PMID: 37438718

A Tool to Assess Fitness Among Adults in Public Health Studies - Predictive Validity of the FFB-Mot Questionnaire

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Public Health
Date 2023 Jul 12
PMID 37438718
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Fitness has important implications for physical activity behavior and is associated with various health-related outcomes. It can be assessed through a test battery or a self-reported questionnaire. One example is the FFB-Mot (Funktionsfragebogen Motorik; engl. functional fitness questionnaire) which consist of 28 items to assess four components of fitness in adults: cardiorespiratory fitness/ endurance, muscular strength, gross motor coordination, and flexibility. The aims of this manuscript were to (1) provide an English-version of the FFB-Mot questionnaire (developed from the German-version using translation and back-translation) to the international community of researchers in the areas of physical activity, fitness and health in adults, and (2) examine the predictive validity of the FFB-Mot questionnaire in a large sample of community-dwelling adults.

Methods: We used data from a longitudinal study in Germany with four measurement waves over a period of 18 years, with samples ranging between 310 and 437 participants (1572 adults in total, mean ages 46-58 years). To assess predictive validity, we calculated Pearson correlations between FFB-Mot data collected in 1997 and external health-related criteria (i.e., subjective health status, physician-rated health status, back pain, physical complaints and physical activity in minutes per week) collected in 2002, 2010, and 2015, and separately for males and females.

Results: We observed correlations between higher FFB-Mot scores with better subjective health status (in 2002: males, r = 0.25; females, r = 0.18; in 2010: males, r = 0.29; females, r = 0.28; in 2015: males, r = 0.40), and higher physical activity (in 2002: males, r = 0.24; females, r = 0.25; in 2010: males, r = 0.30; females, r = 0.38; in 2015: females, r = 0.27). Higher FFB-Mot scores were also correlated with lower back pain (in 2002: males, r = -0.23; females, r = -0.25; in 2010: females, r = -0.22), less physical complaints (in 2002: males, r = -0.36; females, r = -0.24), and better physician-rated health status (in 2002: males, r = -0.41; females, r = -0.29, 2010: males, r = -0.38; females, r = -0.44; in 2015: males, r = -0.47).

Conclusions: Our results suggest that the FFB-Mot to assess fitness in adults has predictive validity for health-related outcomes as indicated by significant correlations, albeit some effect sizes are small. The FFB-Mot may be used as one-time assessment of self-reported fitness, or for repeated testing to assess change of self-reported fitness over time and in different settings (e.g., public health research).

References
1.
Horder H, Johansson L, Guo X, Grimby G, Kern S, Ostling S . Midlife cardiovascular fitness and dementia: A 44-year longitudinal population study in women. Neurology. 2018; 90(15):e1298-e1305. PMC: 5894933. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000005290. View

2.
Lee D, Sui X, Ortega F, Kim Y, Church T, Winett R . Comparisons of leisure-time physical activity and cardiorespiratory fitness as predictors of all-cause mortality in men and women. Br J Sports Med. 2010; 45(6):504-10. DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.066209. View

3.
Wilder R, Greene J, Winters K, Long 3rd W, Gubler K, Edlich R . Physical fitness assessment: an update. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2006; 16(2):193-204. DOI: 10.1615/jlongtermeffmedimplants.v16.i2.90. View

4.
Tikkanen E, Gustafsson S, Ingelsson E . Associations of Fitness, Physical Activity, Strength, and Genetic Risk With Cardiovascular Disease: Longitudinal Analyses in the UK Biobank Study. Circulation. 2018; 137(24):2583-2591. PMC: 5997501. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.032432. View

5.
Jackson A, Blair S, Mahar M, Wier L, Ross R, Stuteville J . Prediction of functional aerobic capacity without exercise testing. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1990; 22(6):863-70. DOI: 10.1249/00005768-199012000-00021. View