Screening for physical activity in family practice - Evaluation of two brief assessment tools

Smith, Ben J., Marshall, Alison L. and Huang, Nancy (2005) Screening for physical activity in family practice - Evaluation of two brief assessment tools. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 29 4: 256-264. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2005.07.005

Author Smith, Ben J.
Marshall, Alison L.
Huang, Nancy
Title Screening for physical activity in family practice - Evaluation of two brief assessment tools
Journal name American Journal of Preventive Medicine   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0749-3797
Publication date 2005
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.07.005
Volume 29
Issue 4
Start page 256
End page 264
Total pages 9
Editor F. D. Scutchfield
K. Patrick
C. S. Seidman
Place of publication New York
Publisher Elsevier Science Inc
Collection year 2005
Language eng
Subject C1
321216 Health Promotion
730301 Health education and promotion
Abstract Background: Physical activity (PA) is relevant to the prevention and management of many health conditions in family practice. There is a need for an efficient, reliable, and valid assessment tool to identify patients in need of PA interventions. Methods: Twenty-eight family physicians in three Australian cities assessed the PA of their adult patients during 2004 using either a two- (2Q) or three-question (3Q) assessment. This was administered again approximately 3 days later to evaluate test-retest reliability. Concurrent validity was evaluated by measuring agreement with the Active Australia Questionnaire, and criterion validity by comparison with 7-day Computer Science Applications, Inc. (CSA) accelerometer counts. Results: A total of 509 patients participated, with 428 (84%) completing a repeat assessment, and 415 (82%) accelerometer monitoring. The brief assessments had moderate test-retest reliability (2Q k = 58.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47.2-68.8%; 3Q k = 55.6%, 95% CI = 43.8-67.4%); fair to moderate concurrent validity (2Q k = 46.7%, 95% CI = 35.657.9%; 3Q k = 38.7%, 95% CI = 26.4-51.1%); and poor to fair criterion validity (2Q k = 18.2%, 95% CI = 3.9-32.6%; 3Q k = 24.3%, 95% CI = 11.6-36.9%) for identifying patients as sufficiently active. A four-level scale of PA derived from the PA assessments was significantly correlated with accelerometer minutes (2Q rho = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.28-0.49; 3Q rho = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.18-0.43). Physicians reported that the assessments took I to 2 minutes to complete. Conclusions: Both PA assessments were feasible to use in family practice, and were suitable for identifying the least active patients. The 2Q assessment was preferred by clinicians and may be most appropriate for dissemination.
Keyword Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Medicine, General & Internal
Q-Index Code C1

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: 2006 Higher Education Research Data Collection
School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 51 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 52 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 15 Aug 2007, 05:51:35 EST