Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
PLoS One. 2014 Feb 6;9(2):e87085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0087085. eCollection 2014.

Comparison of the EPIC Physical Activity Questionnaire with combined heart rate and movement sensing in a nationally representative sample of older British adults.

Author information

  • 1Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
  • 2Medical Research Council Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at University College London, London, United Kingdom ; Epidemiology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, School of Medicine and Dentistry, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
  • 3Medical Research Council Unit for Lifelong Health and Ageing at University College London, London, United Kingdom.
  • 4Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, School of Clinical Medicine, Institute of Metabolic Science, Cambridge, United Kingdom ; Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Norges Idrettshøgskole, Oslo, Norway.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

To compare physical activity (PA) subcomponents from EPIC Physical Activity Questionnaire (EPAQ2) and combined heart rate and movement sensing in older adults.

METHODS:

Participants aged 60-64y from the MRC National Survey of Health and Development in Great Britain completed EPAQ2, which assesses self-report PA in 4 domains (leisure time, occupation, transportation and domestic life) during the past year and wore a combined sensor for 5 consecutive days. Estimates of PA energy expenditure (PAEE), sedentary behaviour, light (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) were obtained from EPAQ2 and combined sensing and compared. Complete data were available in 1689 participants (52% women).

RESULTS:

EPAQ2 estimates of PAEE and MVPA were higher than objective estimates and sedentary time and LPA estimates were lower [bias (95% limits of agreement) in men and women were 32.3 (-61.5 to 122.6) and 29.0 (-39.2 to 94.6) kJ/kg/day for PAEE; -4.6 (-10.6 to 1.3) and -6.0 (-10.9 to -1.0) h/day for sedentary time; -171.8 (-454.5 to 110.8) and -60.4 (-367.5 to 246.6) min/day for LPA; 91.1 (-159.5 to 341.8) and 55.4 (-117.2 to 228.0) min/day for MVPA]. There were significant positive correlations between all self-reported and objectively assessed PA subcomponents (rho= 0.12 to 0.36); the strongest were observed for MVPA (rho = 0.30 men; rho = 0.36 women) and PAEE (rho = 0.26 men; rho = 0.25 women).

CONCLUSION:

EPAQ2 produces higher estimates of PAEE and MVPA and lower estimates of sedentary and LPA than objective assessment. However, both methodologies rank individuals similarly, suggesting that EPAQ2 may be used in etiological studies in this population.

PMID:
24516543
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PMCID:
PMC3916297
Free PMC Article
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Public Library of Science Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk