Article

OBJECTIVE: To assess the criterion validity and reproducibility of a new
pedometer in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). DESIGN:
Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Outpatient physiotherapy clinic from a university
hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with COPD (N=30; 17 men; forced expiratory
volume in the first second, 44+/-17% predicted) were videotaped while performing
2 protocols: one including 2 slow and 2 fast 5-minute walks, and another
including a circuit of activities of daily living (ADLs). Concomitantly, patients
wore 2 motion sensors: the new pedometer and a multisensor accelerometer. INTERVENTIONS: None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Step counting (SC), energy
expenditure (EE), walking distance (WD), activity time (AT), and walking
intensity (WI) registered by the pedometer were compared with video and the
multisensor as criterion methods. RESULTS: Correlations between the pedometer and
the criterion method were high for SC during slow and fast walking (r=.79 and
r=.95) and for EE during fast walking (r=.83). Correlation was more modest for EE
during slow walking (r=.65) and for WD and WI during both speeds (.47<r<.68). The
agreement between methods was also good, according to Bland-Altman plots. The
device was reproducible for registering SC, WD, and EE during slow walking and
for all variables during fast walking (intraclass correlation coefficient >.79
for all). During the ADLs circuit, the pedometer underestimated AT by an average
of 55% but provided an acceptable EE estimation in a group basis (average
difference of 6% with the multisensor). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with COPD, the
new pedometer analyzed in the present study is reproducible for most outcomes and
highly valid for SC during slow and fast walking and EE during fast walking. The
device's validity is more limited for EE during slow walking, and WD and WI at
both speeds. Furthermore, during the performance of ADLs, it significantly
underestimates activity time but provides an acceptable estimation of EE in a
group basis.
CI - Copyright (c) 2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by
Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Langue : ANGLAIS