The improved physical activity index for measuring physical activity in EPIC Germany

Angelika Wientzek, Matthäus Vigl, Karen Steindorf, Boris Brühmann, Manuela M Bergmann, Ulrich Harttig, Verena Katzke, Rudolf Kaaks, Heiner Boeing, Angelika Wientzek, Matthäus Vigl, Karen Steindorf, Boris Brühmann, Manuela M Bergmann, Ulrich Harttig, Verena Katzke, Rudolf Kaaks, Heiner Boeing

Abstract

In the European Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study (EPIC), physical activity (PA) has been indexed as a cross-tabulation between PA at work and recreational activity. As the proportion of non-working participants increases, other categorization strategies are needed. Therefore, our aim was to develop a valid PA index for this population, which will also be able to express PA continuously. In the German EPIC centers Potsdam and Heidelberg, a clustered sample of 3,766 participants was re-invited to the study center. 1,615 participants agreed to participate and 1,344 participants were finally included in this study. PA was measured by questionnaires on defined activities and a 7-day combined heart rate and acceleration sensor. In a training sample of 433 participants, the Improved Physical Activity Index (IPAI) was developed. Its performance was evaluated in a validation sample of 911 participants and compared with the Cambridge Index and the Total PA Index. The IPAI consists of items covering five areas including PA at work, sport, cycling, television viewing, and computer use. The correlations of the IPAI with accelerometer counts in the training and validation sample ranged r = 0.40-0.43 and with physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) r = 0.33-0.40 and were higher than for the Cambridge Index and the Total PA Index previously applied in EPIC. In non-working participants the IPAI showed higher correlations than the Cambridge Index and the Total PA Index, with r = 0.34 for accelerometer counts and r = 0.29 for PAEE. In conclusion, we developed a valid physical activity index which is able to express PA continuously as well as to categorize participants according to their PA level. In populations with increasing rates of non-working people the performance of the IPAI is better than the established indices used in EPIC.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Figure 1. Linear regression analysis between accelerometer…
Figure 1. Linear regression analysis between accelerometer counts and the countinuously measured Improved Physical Activity Index (IPAI) in 1,344 participants of the EPIC Germany sub-study.

References

    1. Helmerhorst HJ, Brage S, Warren J, Besson H, Ekelund U (2012) A systematic review of reliability and objective criterion-related validity of physical activity questionnaires. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 9: 103.
    1. Cust AE, Smith BJ, Chau J, van der Ploeg HP, Friedenreich CM, et al. (2008) Validity and repeatability of the EPIC physical activity questionnaire: a validation study using accelerometers as an objective measure. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 5: 33.
    1. InterAct C (2012) Validity of a short questionnaire to assess physical activity in 10 European countries. Eur J Epidemiol 27: 15–25.
    1. Warren JM, Ekelund U, Besson H, Mezzani A, Geladas N, et al. (2010) Assessment of physical activity - a review of methodologies with reference to epidemiological research: a report of the exercise physiology section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 17: 127–139.
    1. Riboli E, Kaaks R (1997) The EPIC Project: rationale and study design. European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Int J Epidemiol 26 Suppl 1S6–14.
    1. Boeing H, Wahrendorf J, Becker N (1999) EPIC-Germany—A source for studies into diet and risk of chronic diseases. European Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. Ann Nutr Metab 43: 195–204.
    1. Wareham NJ, Jakes RW, Rennie KL, Mitchell J, Hennings S, et al. (2002) Validity and repeatability of the EPIC-Norfolk Physical Activity Questionnaire. Int J Epidemiol 31: 168–174.
    1. Spittaels H, Verloigne M, Gidlow C, Gloanec J, Titze S, et al. (2010) Measuring physical activity-related environmental factors: reliability and predictive validity of the European environmental questionnaire ALPHA. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 7: 48.
    1. Brage S, Brage N, Franks PW, Ekelund U, Wareham NJ (2005) Reliability and validity of the combined heart rate and movement sensor Actiheart. Eur J Clin Nutr 59: 561–570.
    1. Tanaka H, Monahan KD, Seals DR (2001) Age-predicted maximal heart rate revisited. J Am Coll Cardiol 37: 153–156.
    1. Brage S, Ekelund U, Brage N, Hennings MA, Froberg K, et al. (2007) Hierarchy of individual calibration levels for heart rate and accelerometry to measure physical activity. J Appl Physiol 103: 682–692.
    1. Wareham NJ, Jakes RW, Rennie KL, Schuit J, Mitchell J, et al. (2003) Validity and repeatability of a simple index derived from the short physical activity questionnaire used in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Public Health Nutr 6: 407–413.
    1. Friedenreich C, Norat T, Steindorf K, Boutron-Ruault MC, Pischon T, et al. (2006) Physical activity and risk of colon and rectal cancers: the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15: 2398–2407.
    1. Ainsworth BE, Haskell WL, Herrmann SD, Meckes N, Bassett DR Jr, et al. (2011) 2011 Compendium of Physical Activities: a second update of codes and MET values. Med Sci Sports Exerc 43: 1575–1581.
    1. Rosner B (2010) Fundamentals of Biostatistics. Boston: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
    1. Buchowski MS, Choi L, Majchrzak KM, Acra S, Mathews CE, et al. (2009) Seasonal changes in amount and patterns of physical activity in women. J Phys Act Health 6: 252–261.
    1. McCarney R, Warner J, Iliffe S, van Haselen R, Griffin M, et al. (2007) The Hawthorne Effect: a randomised, controlled trial. BMC Med Res Methodol 7: 30.
    1. Chun MY (2012) Validity and reliability of korean version of international physical activity questionnaire short form in the elderly. Korean J Fam Med 33: 144–151.
    1. Tomioka K, Iwamoto J, Saeki K, Okamoto N (2011) Reliability and validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) in elderly adults: the Fujiwara-kyo Study. J Epidemiol 21: 459–465.
    1. Dorner TE, Stronegger WJ, Hoffmann K, Stein KV, Niederkrotenthaler T (2013) Socio-economic determinants of health behaviours across age groups: results of a cross-sectional survey. Wien Klin Wochenschr.
    1. Seefeldt V, Malina RM, Clark MA (2002) Factors affecting levels of physical activity in adults. Sports Med 32: 143–168.
    1. Straker L, Campbell A (2012) Translation equations to compare ActiGraph GT3X and Actical accelerometers activity counts. BMC Med Res Methodol 12: 54.
    1. Tooze JA, Troiano RP, Carroll RJ, Moshfegh AJ, Freedman LS (2013) A measurement error model for physical activity level as measured by a questionnaire with application to the 1999–2006 NHANES questionnaire. Am J Epidemiol 177: 1199–1208.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever