Assessment of physical activity using accelerometry, an activity diary, the heart rate method and the Indian Migration Study questionnaire in South Indian adults

• Published in: Public health nutrition 2010-01, Vol.13 (1), p.47-53
• Main Authors: Bharathi, Ankalmadagu V, Kuriyan, Rebecca, Kurpad, Anura V, Thomas, Tinku, Ebrahim, Shah, Kinra, Sanjay, Lyngdoh, Tanica, Reddy, Srinath K, Dorairaj, Prabhakaran, Vaz, Mario
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Accelerometers; Adult; adults; Assessment and methodology; Basal Metabolism - physiology; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diaries; Energy Metabolism - physiology; Exercise; Female; health status; Heart rate; Heart Rate - physiology; human health; Humans; India; Indian Migration Study questionnaire; lifestyle; Male; Metabolism; Methods; Middle Aged; Motor Activity - physiology; Oxygen Consumption; Physical activity; Predictive Value of Tests; Questionnaires; Reference Values; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Surveys and Questionnaires - standards; testing; Validation studies; validity; Walking; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1368-9800; 1475-2727; 1475-2727
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980009005850

To validate questionnaire-based physical activity level (PAL) against accelerometry and a 24 h physical activity diary (24 h AD) as reference methods (Protocol 2), after validating these reference methods against the heart rate-oxygen consumption (HRVO2) method (Protocol 1). Cross-sectional study. Two villages in Andhra Pradesh state and Bangalore city, South India. Ninety-four participants (fifty males, forty-four females) for Protocol 2; thirteen males for Protocol 1. In Protocol 2, mean PAL derived from the questionnaire (1.72 (sd 0.20)) was comparable to that from the 24 h AD (1.78 (sd 0.20)) but significantly higher than the mean PAL derived from accelerometry (1.36 (sd 0.20); P < 0.001). Mean bias of PAL from the questionnaire was larger against the accelerometer (0.36) than against the 24 h AD (-0.06), but with large limits of agreement against both. Correlations of PAL from the questionnaire with that of the accelerometer (r = 0.28; P = 0.01) and the 24 h AD (r = 0.30; P = 0.006) were modest. In Protocol 1, mean PAL from the 24 h AD (1.65 (sd 0.18)) was comparable, while that from the accelerometer (1.51 (sd 0.23)) was significantly lower (P < 0.001), than mean PAL obtained from the HRVO2 method (1.69 (sd 0.21)). The questionnaire showed acceptable validity with the reference methods in a group with a wide range of physical activity levels. The accelerometer underestimated PAL in comparison with the HRVO2 method.