Advertisement

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 30, Issue 2, pp 199–203 | Cite as

Criterion-related validity of self-reported stair climbing in older adults

  • Sara Higueras-Fresnillo
  • Irene Esteban-Cornejo
  • Pablo Gasque
  • Oscar L. Veiga
  • David Martinez-Gomez
Short Communication

Abstract

Introduction

Stair climbing is an activity of daily living that might contribute to increase levels of physical activity (PA). To date, there is no study examining the validity of climbing stairs assessed by self-report. The aim of this study was, therefore, to examine the validity of estimated stair climbing from one question included in a common questionnaire compared to a pattern-recognition activity monitor in older adults.

Methods

A total of 138 older adults (94 women), aged 65–86 years (70.9 ± 4.7 years), from the IMPACT65 + study participated in this validity study. Estimates of stair climbing were obtained from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) PA questionnaire. An objective assessment of stair climbing was obtained with the Intelligent Device for Energy Expenditure and Activity (IDEEA) monitor.

Results

The correlation between both methods to assess stair climbing was fair (ρ = 0.22, p = 0.008 for PA energy expenditure and ρ = 0.26, p = 0.002 for duration). Mean differences between self-report and the IDEEA were 7.96 ± 10.52 vs. 9.88 ± 3.32 METs-min/day for PA energy expenditure, and 0.99 ± 1.32 vs. 1.79 ± 2.02 min/day for duration (both Wilcoxon test p < 0.001). Results from the Bland–Altman analysis indicate that bias between both instruments were −1.91 ± 10.30 METs-min/day and −0.80 ± 1.99 min/day, and corresponding limits of agreement for the two instruments were from 18.27 to −22.10 METs-min/day and from 3.09 to −4.70 min/day, respectively.

Conclusion

Our results indicate that self-reported stair climbing has modest validity to accurately rank old age participants, and underestimates both PAEE and its duration, as compared with an objectively measured method.

Keywords

Climbing stairs Physical activity Energy expenditure Validity Elderly Accelerometer 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

This work was supported by Grants from MINECO I + D + i (DEP2013-47786-R), UAM-Santander (CEAL-AL/2015-20), and Real Madrid-UEM (P2016/RM09).

Ethical Approval

All procedures were performed in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the appropriate institutional review committee.

Informed consent

All participants gave their informed consent to participate in the study.

References

  1. 1.
    Jefferis BJ, Sartini C, Lee I-M et al (2014) Adherence to physical activity guidelines in older adults, using objectively measured physical activity in a population-based study. BMC Public Health 14:382CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee KK, Perry AS, Wolf SA et al (2012) Promoting routine stair use: evaluating the impact of a stair prompt across buildings. Am J Prev Med 42:136–141CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wareham NJ, Jakes RW, Rennie KL et al (2003) Validity and repeatability of a simple index derived from the short physical activity questionnaire used in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Public Health Nutr 6:407–413CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor HL, Jacobs DR, Schucker B et al (1978) A questionnaire for the assessment of leisure time physical activities. J Chron Dis 31:741–755CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wolf AM, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA et al (1994) Reproducibility and validity of a self-administered physical activity questionnaire. Int J Epidemiol 23:991–999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chasan-Taber S, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ et al (1996) Reproducibility and validity of a self-administered physical activity questionnaire for male health professionals. Epidemiol Camb Mass 7:81–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Paffenbarger RS, Wing AL, Hyde RT (1978) Physical activity as an index of heart attack risk in college alumni. Am J Epidemiol 108:161–175CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shiroma EJ, Sesso HD, Moorthy MV et al (2014) Do moderate-intensity and vigorous-intensity physical activities reduce mortality rates to the same extent? J Am Heart Assoc 3:e000802CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hupin D, Roche F, Gremeaux V et al (2015) Even a low-dose of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity reduces mortality by 22% in adults aged ≥60 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med 49:1262–1267CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee IM, Paffenbarger RS (2000) Associations of light, moderate, and vigorous intensity physical activity with longevity. The Harvard Alumni Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 151:293–299CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang K, Werner P, Sun M et al (2003) Measurement of human daily physical activity. Obes Res 11:33–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang K, Pi-Sunyer FX, Boozer CN (2004) Improving energy expenditure estimation for physical activity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36:883–889CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cust AE, Smith BJ, Chau J et al (2008) Validity and repeatability of the EPIC physical activity questionnaire: a validation study using accelerometers as an objective measure. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 5:33CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gorelick ML, Bizzini M, Maffiuletti NA et al (2009) Test-retest reliability of the IDEEA system in the quantification of step parameters during walking and stair climbing. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 29:271–276CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Arvidsson D, Slinde F, Larsson S et al (2009) Energy cost in children assessed by multisensor activity monitors. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41:603–611CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wolfsgruber S, Jessen F, Koppara A et al (2015) Subjective cognitive decline is related to CSF biomarkers of AD in patients with MCI. Neurology 84:1261–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hinman MR, O’Connell JK, Dorr M et al (2014) Functional predictors of stair-climbing speed in older adults. J Geriatr Phys Ther 2001 37:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    España-Romero V, Golubic R, Martin KR et al (2014) Comparison of the EPIC physical activity questionnaire with combined heart rate and movement sensing in a nationally representative sample of older british adults. PLoS One 9:6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Troiano RP, Berrigan D, Dodd KW et al (2008) Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 40:181–188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Higueras-Fresnillo
    • 1
  • Irene Esteban-Cornejo
    • 2
  • Pablo Gasque
    • 1
  • Oscar L. Veiga
    • 1
  • David Martinez-Gomez
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Physical Education, Sports, and Human MovementAutonomous University of MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Sport SciencesUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain

Personalised recommendations