Perceived versus actual distance to local physical-activity facilities: does it really matter?

BACKGROUND: Research in adults shows poor agreement between self-reported and objectively measured proximity to physical activity resources; however there is little such research in adolescents. This study assessed the level of agreement between self-reported and objective measures of distance to physical activity resources in adolescents; and whether perceived or actual distance was related to actual use and physical activity levels. METHODS: 110 New Zealand high school students (12-18 years) were asked the time (in minutes) it would take them to walk from their home to the nearest physical activity resource, and whether they had used it in the previous month. The distance from participants' homes to the nearest resource was measured using GIS. Physical activity was assessed with accelerometers. RESULTS: Agreement was poor, with weighted Kappa Indices ranging from 0.1 to 0.4. The facilities used most frequently were schools (90%), public parks (76%), and playing fields (74%). Closer location was associated with higher use of some facilities only. Moderate-to-vigorous activity levels were not associated with self-reported or measured distance. CONCLUSIONS: Agreement between perceived and measured access is poor among adolescents. Further research is needed to understand how individual and social factors interact with environmental factors and whether improving awareness improves use.

Correlates of agreement between accelerometry and self-reported physical activity

PURPOSE: Understanding factors that influence accurate assessment of physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior (SB) is important to measurement development, epidemiologic studies, and interventions. This study examined agreement between self-reported (International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Long Form [IPAQ-LF]) and accelerometry-based estimates of PA and SB across six countries and identified correlates of between-method agreement. METHODS: Self-report and objective (accelerometry-based) PA and SB data were collected in 2002-2011 from 3865 adult participants in eight cities from six countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Spain, United Kingdom, and United States). Between-method relative agreement (correlation) and absolute disagreement (mean difference between conceptually and intensity-matched IPAQ-LF and accelerometry-based PA and SB variables) were estimated. Also, sociodemographic characteristics and PA patterns were examined as correlates of between-method agreement. RESULTS: Observed relative agreement (relationships of IPAQ-LF with accelerometry-based PA and SB variables) was small to moderate (r = 0.05-0.37) and was moderated by sociodemographic (age, sex, weight status, and education) and behavioral (PA-type) factors. The absolute disagreement was large, with participants self-reporting higher PA intensity and total time in moderate-to-vigorous-intensity PA than accelerometry. Also, self-reported sitting time was lower than accelerometry-based sedentary behavior. After adjusting for sociodemographic and behavioral factors, the absolute disagreement between pairs of IPAQ-LF and accelerometry-based PA variables remained significantly different across cities/countries. CONCLUSIONS: Present findings suggest systematic cultural and/or linguistic and sociodemographic differences in absolute agreement between the IPAQ-LF and the accelerometry-based PA and SB variables. These results have implications for the interpretation of international PA and SB data and correlate/determinant studies. They call for further efforts to improve such measures.

Do cognitive, language, or physical impairments affect participation in a trial of self-management programs for stroke?

BACKGROUND: Research studies may have limited generalizability when survivors of stroke with physical, language, or cognitive impairments are excluded. AIMS: To assess whether presence of cognitive, language, or global impairments affects participation in self-management programs.

METHODS: Stroke survivors were recruited in South Australia from seven hospitals or via advertisements into a randomized controlled trial (1:1:1 ratio) of a Stroke Self-Management Program, the Stanford chronic condition self-management program, or standard care. Impairment status was measured using: Cognistat (cognition), Frenchay Aphasia assessment (language), modified Rankin Score (mRS; where score 3-5 = global disability).

PRIMARY OUTCOMES: participation (i.e. booked, accessed, and completed a program (defined as attending ≥ 50% of sessions)) and safety (i.e. adverse events). Outcomes were compared by impairment status. RESULTS: Among 315 people screened 143/149 eligible were randomized (median age 71 years; 41% male; with impairments: 62% cognitive, 34% language, 64% global disability). Participation did not differ by cognitive or language impairment status (cognitive 75%, no cognitive 68%, p = 0.54; language 78%, no language 69%, p = 0.42). However, participation did vary by global impairment status (global disability 61%, no disability 96%, p < 0.001). Participants with cognitive impairment experienced more adverse events (severe n = 9 versus no cognitive impairment n = 1).

CONCLUSION: Survivors of stroke with cognitive, language, or global impairments are able to participate in self-management programs and should be included in these types of research studies or programs. Reduced participation by those with global disability and the possibility of more adverse events in people with cognitive impairments needs to be considered.