IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i16p6579-d1217335.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Test–Retest Reliability, Agreement and Criterion Validity of Three Questionnaires for the Assessment of Physical Activity and Sedentary Time in Patients with Myocardial Infarction

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Bargholtz

    (Department of Medicine, Lindesberg Hospital, 711 82 Lindesberg, Sweden)

  • Madeleine Brosved

    (Department of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden)

  • Katarina Heimburg

    (Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Neurology, Skane University Hospital, Lund University, 222 42 Lund, Sweden)

  • Marie Hellmark

    (Department of Physiotherapy, Orebro University Hospital, 701 85 Orebro, Sweden)

  • Margret Leosdottir

    (Department of Cardiology, Skane University Hospital, 214 28 Malmo, Sweden
    Department of Clinical Sciences Malmo, Lund University, 214 28 Malmo, Sweden)

  • Maria Hagströmer

    (Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Division of Physiotherapy, Karolinska Institutet, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
    Academic Primary Health Care Centre, Region Stockholm, 113 65 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Maria Bäck

    (Department of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, 413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden
    Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Linkoping University, 581 83 Linkoping, Sweden)

Abstract

Regular physical activity (PA) and limited sedentary time (SED) are highly recommended in international guidelines for patients after a myocardial infarction (MI). Data on PA and SED are often self-reported in clinical practice and, hence, reliable and valid questionnaires are crucial. This study aimed to assess the test–retest reliability, criterion validity and agreement of two PA and one SED questionnaire commonly used in clinical practice, developed by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (BHW) and the Swedish national quality register SWEDEHEART. Data from 57 patients (mean age 66 ± 9.2 years, 42 males) was included in this multi-centre study. The patients answered three questionnaires on PA and SED at seven-day intervals and wore an accelerometer for seven days. Test–retest reliability, criterion validity and agreement were assessed using Spearman’s rho and linearly weighted kappa. Test–retest reliability was moderate for three of the six-sub questions (k = 0.43–0.54) within the PA questionnaires. For criterion validity, the correlation was fair within three of the six sub-questions (r = 0.41–0.50) within the PA questionnaires. The SED questionnaire had low agreement (k = 0.12) and criterion validity (r = 0.30). The studied questionnaires for PA could be used in clinical practice as a screening tool and/or to evaluate the level of PA in patients with an MI. Future research is recommended to develop and/or evaluate SED questionnaires in patients with an MI.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Bargholtz & Madeleine Brosved & Katarina Heimburg & Marie Hellmark & Margret Leosdottir & Maria Hagströmer & Maria Bäck, 2023. "Test–Retest Reliability, Agreement and Criterion Validity of Three Questionnaires for the Assessment of Physical Activity and Sedentary Time in Patients with Myocardial Infarction," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(16), pages 1-10, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:16:p:6579-:d:1217335
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/16/6579/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/16/6579/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Orrell, Alison & Doherty, Patrick & Coulton, Simon & Miles, Jeremy & Stamatakis, Emmanuel & Lewin, Robert, 2007. "Failure to validate the Health Survey for England physical activity module in a cardiac population," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(2-3), pages 262-268, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:16:p:6579-:d:1217335. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.