Reliability of pedometer data in samples of youth and older women

Lisa A Strycker, Susan C Duncan, Nigel R Chaumeton, Terry E Duncan, Deborah J Toobert, Lisa A Strycker, Susan C Duncan, Nigel R Chaumeton, Terry E Duncan, Deborah J Toobert

Abstract

Background: Pedometers offer researchers a convenient and inexpensive tool for objective measurement of physical activity. However, many unanswered questions remain about expected values for steps/day for different populations, sources of variation in the data, and reliability of pedometer measurements.

Methods: This study documented and compared mean steps/day, demographic predictors of steps/day, and pedometer reliability in two longitudinal investigations, one involving a population-based youth sample (N = 367) and the other targeting postmenopausal women with type 2 diabetes (N = 270). Individuals were asked to wear pedometers (Yamax model SW-701) at the waist for 7 days and record steps/per day. They were also asked to record daily physical activities, duration, and perceived intensity (1 = low/light, 2 = medium/moderate, 3 = high/hard) for the same 7 days. In addition, survey data regarding usual physical activity was collected. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) were conducted to determine whether there were significant differences in pedometer results according to sex, age, and body mass index. Repeated measures ANOVAs were used to examine potential differences in results among differing numbers of days.

Results: Mean steps/day were 10,365 steps in the youth sample and 4,352 steps in the sample of older women. Girls took significantly fewer steps than boys, older women took fewer steps than younger women, and both youth and women with greater body mass took fewer steps than those with lower body mass. Reliability coefficients of .80 or greater were obtained with 5 or more days of data collection in the youth sample and 2 or more days in the sample of older women. Youth and older women were more active on weekdays than on weekends. Low but significant associations were found between step counts and self-report measures of physical activity in both samples.

Conclusion: Mean steps/day and reliability estimates in the two samples were generally consistent with previously published studies of pedometer use. Based on these two studies, unsealed pedometers were found to offer an easy-to-use and cost-effective objective measure of physical activity in both youth and older adult populations.

References

    1. Freedson PS, Miller K. Objective monitoring of physical activity using motion sensors and heart rate. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2000;71:21–9.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Bassett DR, Jr, Swartz AM, Strath SJ, Parr BB, Reiss JP, DuBose KD, Ainsworth BE. A preliminary study of one year of pedometer self-monitoring. Ann Behav Med. 2004;28:158–62. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm2803_3.
    1. Rowe DA, Mahar MT, Raedeke TD, Lore J. Measuring physical activity in children with pedometers: reliability, reactivity, and replacement of missing data. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2004;16:343–54.
    1. Vincent SD, Pangrazi RP. Does reactivity exist in children when measuring activity levels with pedometers? Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2002;14:56–63.
    1. Ozdoba R, Corbin CB, Le Masurier GC. Does reactivity exist in children when measuring activity levels with unsealed pedometers? Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2004;16:158–66.
    1. Cardon G, De Bourdeaudhuij I. A pilot study comparing pedometer counts with reported physical activity in elementary schoolchildren. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2004;16:355–67.
    1. Wilde BE, Corbin CB, Le Masurier GC. Free-living pedometer step counts of high school students. Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2004;16:44–53.
    1. Vincent SD, Pangrazi RP, Raustorp A, Tomson LM, Cuddihy TF. Activity levels and body mass index of children in the United States, Sweden, and Australia. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35:1367–73. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000079024.40014.91.
    1. Sequeira MM, Richardson M, Wietlisbach V, Tullen B, Schutz Y. Physical activity assessment using a pedometer and its comparison with a questionnaire in a large population study. Am J Epidemiol. 1995;142:989–99.
    1. Hatano Y. Use of the pedometer for promoting daily walking exercise. Intern Council for Health, Phys Educ, and Recreation. 1993;29:4–8.
    1. Sieminiski DJ, Cowell LL, Montgomery PS, Pillai SB, Gardner AW. Physical activity monitoring in patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 1997;17:43–7. doi: 10.1097/00008483-199701000-00006.
    1. Belcher GL, Radomisli TE, Abate JA, Stabile LA, Trafton PG. Functional outcome analysis of operatively treated malleolar fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11:106–9. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199702000-00007.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Myers AM, Bell RC, Harris SB, Rodger NW. Preliminary outcome evaluation of the First Step Program: a daily physical activity intervention for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;47:23–8. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(01)00169-0.
    1. Rowlands AV, Eston RG, Ingledew DK. Relationship between activity levels, aerobic fitness, and body fat in 8–10 yr-old children. J Appl Psychol. 1999;86:1429–35.
    1. Trost SG, Pate RR, Freedson PS, Sallis JF, Taylor WC. Using objective physical activity measures with youth: how many days of monitoring are needed? Med Sci Sports Exer. 2000;32:426–31. doi: 10.1097/00005768-200002000-00025.
    1. Nelson TE, Leenders NYJM, Sherman WM. Comparison of activity monitors worn during treadmill walking. Med Sci Sports Exer. 1998;30:S11. doi: 10.1097/00005768-199805001-00056. [Abstract]
    1. Duncan SC, Strycker LA, Duncan TE, Chaumeton NR. Telephone recruitment of a random stratified youth sample for a physical activity study. Exer Psychol. 2002;24:347–58.
    1. Duncan SC, Strycker LA, Duncan TE, Chaumeton NR. Neighborhood physical activity opportunity: a multilevel contextual model. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2002;73:457–63.
    1. Toobert DJ, Strycker LA, Glasgow RE, Bagdade JD. If you build it, will they come? Reach and adoption associated with a comprehensive lifestyle management program for women with type 2 diabetes. Patient Educ Couns. 2002;48:99–105. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(02)00120-9.
    1. Toobert DJ, Glasgow RE, Strycker LA, Barrera M, Radcliffe JL, Wander RC, Bagdade JD. Biologic and quality-of-life outcomes from the Mediterranean Lifestyle Program: a randomized clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2003;26:2288–93.
    1. Toobert DJ, Strycker LA, Glasgow RE, Barrera M, Angell K. Effects of the Mediterranean Lifestyle Program on multiple risk behaviors and psychosocial outcomes among women at risk for heart disease. Ann Behav Med. 2005;29:128–37. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm2902_7.
    1. Dale D, Welk GJ, Matthews CE. Methods for assessing physical activity and challenges for research. In: Welk GJ, editor. Physical activity assessments for health-related research. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2002. pp. 19–34.
    1. Crouter SE, Schneider PL, Karabulut K, Bassett DR., Jr Validity of 10 electronic pedometers for measuring steps, distance, and energy cost. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35:1455–60. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078932.61440.A2.
    1. Heath GW, Pate RR, Pratt M. Measuring physical activity among adolescents. Public Health Rep. 1993;108:42–6.
    1. Sallis JF, Buono MJ, Roby JJ, Micale FG, Nelson JA. Seven-day recall and other physical activity self-reports in children and adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1993;25:99–108. doi: 10.1249/00005768-199301000-00014.
    1. Stewart AL, Mills KM, Sepsis PG, King AC, McLellan BY, Roitz K, Ritter PL. Evaluation of CHAMPS, a physical activity promotion program for older adults. Ann Behav Med. 1997;19:353–61.
    1. Rowlands AV, Eston RG. Comparison of accelerometer and pedometer measures of physical activity in boys and girls, ages 8–10 years. Res Q Exerc Sport. 2005;76:251–7.
    1. Tudor-Locke C, Bassett DR., Jr How many steps/day are enough? Preliminary pedometer indices for public health. Sports Med. 2004;34:1–8. doi: 10.2165/00007256-200434010-00001.
    1. Bassett DR, Strath SJ. Use of pedometers to assess physical activity. In: Welk GJ, editor. Physical activity assessments for health-related research. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2002. pp. 163–77.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbeidspartnere

Medisinsk tilstand

Legemiddelintervensjoner

3
Abonnere