Reliability and validity of two multidimensional self-reported physical activity questionnaires in people with chronic low back pain

Author(s)

Carvalho, Flavia A. ^[1] ; Morelhao, Priscila K. ^[1] ; Franco, Marcia R. ^[1] ; Maher, Chris G. ^[2] ; Smeets, Rob J. E. M. ^{[3, 4]} ; Oliveira, Crystian B. ^[1] ; Freitas Junior, Ismael F. ^[1] ; Pinto, Rafael Z. ^{[1, 2]}

Affiliation

^[1] UNESP Univ Estadual Paulista, Fac Ciencias & Tecnol, Dept Fisioterapia, Presidente Prudente - Brazil

^[2] Univ Sydney, Sydney Med Sch, George Inst Global Hlth, Musculoskeletal Div, Sydney, NSW - Australia

^[3] Maastricht Univ, Res Sch Caphri, Dept Rehabil Med, Eindhoven - Netherlands

^[4] Libra Rehabil & Audiol, Eindhoven - Netherlands

• Document type: Journal article
• Source: MUSCULOSKELETAL SCIENCE AND PRACTICE; v. 27, p. 65-70, FEB 2017.
• Web of Science Citations: 2

Abstract

Background: Although there is some evidence for reliability and validity of self-report physical activity (PA) questionnaires in the general adult population, it is unclear whether we can assume similar measurement properties in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). Objective: To determine the test-retest reliability of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) long-version and the Baecke Physical Activity Questionnaire (BPAQ) and their criterion-related validity against data derived from accelerometers in patients with chronic LBP. Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: Patients with non-specific chronic LBP were recruited. Each participant attended the clinic twice (one week interval) and completed self-report PA. Accelerometer measures > 7 days included time spent in moderate-and-vigorous physical activity, steps/day, counts/minute, and vector magnitude counts/minute. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) and Bland and Altman method were used to determine reliability and spearman rho correlation were used for criterion-related validity. Results: A total of 73 patients were included in our analyses. The reliability analyses revealed that the BPAQ and its subscales have moderate to excellent reliability (ICC2,1: 0.61 to 0.81), whereas IPAQ and most IPAQ domains (except walking) showed poor reliability (ICC2,1: 0.20 to 0.40). The Bland and Altman method revealed larger discrepancies for the IPAQ. For the validity analysis, questionnaire and accelerometer measures showed at best fair correlation (rho < 0.37). Conclusions: Although the BPAQ showed better reliability than the IPAQ long-version, both questionnaires did not demonstrate acceptable validity against accelerometer data. These findings suggest that questionnaire and accelerometer PA measures should not be used interchangeably in this population. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. (AU)

• FAPESP's process: 15/17093-7 - Is there an association between fear of movement and physical activity levels in patients seeking care for chronic non-specific low back pain?
• Grantee: Flávia Alves de Carvalho
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships abroad - Research Internship - Scientific Initiation
• FAPESP's process: 14/14077-8 - Investigating the role of physical activity domains in the prognosis of non-specific low back pain
• Grantee: Rafael Zambelli de Almeida Pinto
• Support Opportunities: Research Grants - Young Investigators Grants
• FAPESP's process: 15/07704-9 - Effects of senior dance on risk factors for falls in older adults: a randomised controlled clinical trial
• Grantee: Marcia Rodrigues Franco Zambelli
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Post-Doctoral
• FAPESP's process: 15/02744-2 - Comparing the responsiveness of objective and subjective physical activity-related measures in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain
• Grantee: Priscila Kalil Morelhão
• Support Opportunities: Scholarships in Brazil - Master