首页> 外文期刊>Osteoarthritis and cartilage >Instruments to assess physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a systematic review of measurement properties.
【24h】

Instruments to assess physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a systematic review of measurement properties.

机译:评估髋部或膝部骨关节炎患者身体活动的仪器:对测量特性的系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: There is no consensus on the best approach for measuring physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip or knee. The aims of this study were (1) to identify all physical activity measures that have been validated in patients with OA of the hip or knee and to systematically review their measurement properties, and (2) to give recommendations on which instrument is most suitable for what purpose. DESIGN: A search was performed in PubMed, Embase, and Sportdiscus (complete databases until November 10, 2010). Three reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the included studies, using the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) checklist. Subsequently, the reviewers independently evaluated the quality of the included physical activity instruments, using the recently developed QAPAQ checklist for appraising the qualitative attributes and measurement properties of physical activity questionnaires. RESULTS: Nine studies were included, in which 12 measurement instruments were evaluated: five single-item rating scales, six multi-item questionnaires, and one pedometer. In general, the methodological quality of the studies was poor to moderate. Only the Lower-Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) and the pedometer received positive ratings for content validity. The LEAS and Baecke questionnaire received positive ratings for reliability. The University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), the Tegner score, and the LEAS received positive ratings for construct validity. The Daily Activity Questionnaire (DAQ) received a positive rating for criterion validity. Responsiveness was not evaluated for any of the included instruments. CONCLUSION: For monitoring physical activity levels of populations the UCLA or LEAS seem most useful. For studies measuring physical activity as a risk factor for developing OA or as a protective factor against functional decline there is not enough evidence for any instrument to conclude that it has adequate measurement properties. For follow-up studies on wear in joint replacement patients we recommend to use accelerometers. However, more validation studies of adequate quality are needed for all included instruments.
机译:目的:对于髋或膝骨关节炎(OA)患者测量身体活动的最佳方法尚无共识。这项研究的目的是(1)识别所有已在髋部或膝部OA患者中验证过的身体活动指标,并系统地审查其测量特性,以及(2)就哪种仪器最适合进行测量提出建议。什么目的设计:在PubMed,Embase和Sportdiscus(完整的数据库,直到2010年11月10日)中进行了搜索。三名评审使用基于共识的标准选择健康测量仪器(COSMIN)清单,独立评估了纳入研究的质量。随后,审阅者使用最近开发的QAPAQ清单独立评估所包括的体育锻炼工具的质量,以评估体育锻炼问卷的定性属性和测量属性。结果:共纳入9项研究,其中评估了12种测量工具:5个单项评分量表,6个多项问卷和1个计步器。一般而言,研究的方法学质量差至中等。只有下肢活动量表(LEAS)和计步器在内容有效性方面获得了肯定的评分。 LEAS和Baecke问卷的信度得到肯定的评价。加利福尼亚大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)的Tegner评分和LEAS的结构效度均得到正面评价。每日活动问卷(DAQ)在标准有效性方面获得了积极的评价。没有评估其中包含的任何工具的响应能力。结论:对于监测人群的身体活动水平,UCLA或LEAS似乎最有用。对于将身体活动作为发展为OA的危险因素或作为防止功能衰退的保护性因素进行测量的研究,没有足够的证据来证明任何仪器都具有足够的测量特性。对于关节置换患者磨损的随访研究,我们建议使用加速度计。但是,所有包括在内的仪器都需要进行更多质量足够的验证研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号