Development of a screening tool to identify self-report and device-based measures of habitual physical activity for use in a systematic review: the optima study

Philippa Dall*, Dawn A. Skelton, Christopher A. Seenan, Sarah Rhodes, Trish Gorely, Joanna McParland, Julie Brittenden, Ebuka M. Anieto, Lorna Booth, Cathy Gormal, Jeremy Dearling, Candida Fenton, Sarah Audsley, Kimberley Fairer, Lindsay Bearne, Ukachukwu O. Abaraogu

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to conferenceAbstractpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Physical activity (PA) is defined as any bodily movement produced by skeletal muscles. Measurement tools that purport to measure PA frequently measure only one aspect or focus on a subset of PA. How tools are applied during research and outcome measures reported can also affect suitability to measure habitual PA.

Objective: Develop a screening tool to identify self-report and device-based measures of habitual PA for a systematic review addressing the effect of behaviour-change interventions on habitual PA in people with intermittent claudication (OPTIMA study).

Methods: The screening tool was developed to allow consistent and robust identification of measures of habitual PA (review primary outcome) through expert discussion and literature review, considering both device-based and self-report measures.

Results: Habitual PA was defined as all PA (not just exercise) that a person does during their daily life. Three components were identified that characterised a measure of habitual PA: (a) duration of assessment (number of days, completeness of day); (b) type and intensity of PA assessed; and (c) reported outcome metric. A screening tool was developed asking four questions relating to the three components (Table). A traffic light approach was adopted, where each component could be met fully, partially or not at all. If any component was not met, then the tool was considered to not measure habitual PA. A measure was only considered fully compliant if all three components (four questions) were fully met.

Conclusions: We found the identification of tools and study protocols that appropriately measure habitual PA was difficult, due to the multifaceted nature of habitual PA and the multiplicity of language used to describe PA and exercise. We developed a tool to consistently identify measures of habitual PA for a systematic review. The tool was designed by a small group of experts for a specific purpose and would benefit from wider review.
Original languageEnglish
Pages82-82
Number of pages1
Publication statusPublished - 18 Jun 2024
Event9th International Conference on Ambulatory Monitoring of Physical Activity and Movement (ICAMPAM 2024) - Rennes University, Rennes, France
Duration: 18 Jun 202421 Jun 2024
Conference number: 9th
https://ismpb.org/2024-rennes/

Conference

Conference9th International Conference on Ambulatory Monitoring of Physical Activity and Movement (ICAMPAM 2024)
Abbreviated titleICAMPAM 2024
Country/TerritoryFrance
CityRennes
Period18/06/2421/06/24
Internet address

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Development of a screening tool to identify self-report and device-based measures of habitual physical activity for use in a systematic review: the optima study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this