Measurement Properties of Device-based Physical Activity Instruments in Ambulatory Adults with Physical Disabilities And/or Chronic Diseases: a Scoping Review

Overview

Journal BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2023 Sep 22

PMID 37735403

Authors

Pim Brandenbarg

Femke Hoekstra

Ioulia Barakou

Bregje L Seves

Florentina J Hettinga

Trynke Hoekstra

Lucas H V van der Woude

Rienk Dekker

Leonie A Krops

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: People with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases tend to have an inactive lifestyle. Monitoring physical activity levels is important to provide insight on how much and what types of activities people with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases engage in. This information can be used as input for interventions to promote a physically active lifestyle. Therefore, valid and reliable physical activity measurement instruments are needed. This scoping review aims 1) to provide a critical mapping of the existing literature and 2) directions for future research on measurement properties of device-based instruments assessing physical activity behavior in ambulant adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases.

Methods: Four databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, Embase) were systematically searched from 2015 to April 16 2023 for articles investigating measurement properties of device-based instruments assessing physical activity in ambulatory adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. For the majority, screening and selection of eligible studies were done in duplicate. Extracted data were publication data, study data, study population, device, studied measurement properties and study outcome. Data were synthesized per device.

Results: One hundred three of 21566 Studies were included. 55 Consumer-grade and 23 research-grade devices were studied on measurement properties, using 14 different physical activity outcomes, in 23 different physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. ActiGraph (n = 28) and Fitbit (n = 39) devices were most frequently studied. Steps (n = 68) was the most common used physical activity outcome. 97 studies determined validity, 11 studies reliability and 6 studies responsiveness.

Conclusion: This scoping review shows a large variability in research on measurement properties of device-based instruments in ambulatory adults with physical disabilities and/or chronic diseases. The variability highlights a need for standardization of and consensus on research in this field. The review provides directions for future research.

Citing Articles

Multimodal data-based human motion intention prediction using adaptive hybrid deep learning network for movement challenged person.

Abidi M Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):30633.

PMID: 39719464 PMC: 11668826. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-82624-z.

References

Caspersen C, Powell K, Christenson G . Physical activity, exercise, and physical fitness: definitions and distinctions for health-related research. Public Health Rep. 1985; 100(2):126-31. PMC: 1424733. View

Strath S, Kaminsky L, Ainsworth B, Ekelund U, Freedson P, Gary R . Guide to the assessment of physical activity: Clinical and research applications: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2013; 128(20):2259-79. DOI: 10.1161/01.cir.0000435708.67487.da. View

Haskell W, Lee I, Pate R, Powell K, Blair S, Franklin B . Physical activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2007; 39(8):1423-34. DOI: 10.1249/mss.0b013e3180616b27. View

Martin J . Benefits and barriers to physical activity for individuals with disabilities: a social-relational model of disability perspective. Disabil Rehabil. 2013; 35(24):2030-7. DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2013.802377. View

Hollis N, Zhang Q, Cyrus A, Courtney-Long E, Watson K, Carroll D . Physical activity types among US adults with mobility disability, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2017. Disabil Health J. 2020; 13(3):100888. PMC: 7470910. DOI: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2020.100888. View

Martin Ginis K, van der Ploeg H, Foster C, Lai B, McBride C, Ng K . Participation of people living with disabilities in physical activity: a global perspective. Lancet. 2021; 398(10298):443-455. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01164-8. View

Michie S, Abraham C, Whittington C, McAteer J, Gupta S . Effective techniques in healthy eating and physical activity interventions: a meta-regression. Health Psychol. 2009; 28(6):690-701. DOI: 10.1037/a0016136. View

Rosenberg D, Bombardier C, Hoffman J, Belza B . Physical activity among persons aging with mobility disabilities: shaping a research agenda. J Aging Res. 2011; 2011:708510. PMC: 3124953. DOI: 10.4061/2011/708510. View

van der Woude L, Houdijk H, Janssen T, Seves B, Schelhaas R, Plaggenmarsch C . Rehabilitation: mobility, exercise & sports; a critical position stand on current and future research perspectives. Disabil Rehabil. 2020; 43(24):3476-3491. DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2020.1806365. View

10.

DiPietro L, Al-Ansari S, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Bull F, Buman M . Advancing the global physical activity agenda: recommendations for future research by the 2020 WHO physical activity and sedentary behavior guidelines development group. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020; 17(1):143. PMC: 7690200. DOI: 10.1186/s12966-020-01042-2. View

11.

Troiano R, McClain J, Brychta R, Chen K . Evolution of accelerometer methods for physical activity research. Br J Sports Med. 2014; 48(13):1019-23. PMC: 4141534. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2014-093546. View

12.

Troiano R, Stamatakis E, Bull F . How can global physical activity surveillance adapt to evolving physical activity guidelines? Needs, challenges and future directions. Br J Sports Med. 2020; 54(24):1468-1473. PMC: 7719905. DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102621. View

13.

Morlino P, Balbi B, Guglielmetti S, Giardini M, Grasso M, Giordano C . Gait abnormalities of COPD are not directly related to respiratory function. Gait Posture. 2017; 58:352-357. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.08.020. View

14.

Balaban B, Tok F . Gait disturbances in patients with stroke. PM R. 2014; 6(7):635-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2013.12.017. View

15.

Moon Y, Sung J, An R, Hernandez M, Sosnoff J . Gait variability in people with neurological disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Mov Sci. 2016; 47:197-208. DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2016.03.010. View

16.

van Schaik L, Geertzen J, Dijkstra P, Dekker R . Metabolic costs of activities of daily living in persons with a lower limb amputation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2019; 14(3):e0213256. PMC: 6426184. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0213256. View

17.

Houdijk H, Blokland I, Nazier S, Castenmiller S, van den Heuvel I, IJmker T . Effects of Handrail and Cane Support on Energy Cost of Walking in People With Different Levels and Causes of Lower Limb Amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021; 102(7):1340-1346.e3. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.02.007. View

18.

Buoite Stella A, Morelli M, Giudici F, Sartori A, Manganotti P, di Prampero P . Comfortable walking speed and energy cost of locomotion in patients with multiple sclerosis. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2020; 120(3):551-566. DOI: 10.1007/s00421-019-04295-3. View

19.

Treacy D, Hassett L, Schurr K, Chagpar S, Paul S, Sherrington C . Validity of Different Activity Monitors to Count Steps in an Inpatient Rehabilitation Setting. Phys Ther. 2017; 97(5):581-588. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzx010. View

20.

Gore S, Blackwood J, Guyette M, Alsalaheen B . Validity and Reliability of Accelerometers in Patients With COPD: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2017; 38(3):147-158. DOI: 10.1097/HCR.0000000000000284. View