View
1.671
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
Epidemiological study of physical fitness and physical activity in Flanders
Renaat Philippaerts1,William Duquet (†)2, Johan Lefevre3
1Department of Movement and Sports Sciences,Ghent University
2Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, VUBrussel3Department of Biomedical Kinesiology, KULeuven
Welcome in Gent
3th most historical city in the world (National Geographic, 2008)
1.Wachau (Austria)2.Ontario (Canada)3.Gent (Belgium)
1. Policy Research Centre in Flanders2. Frame of reference3. Computerised questionnaires4. Results5. Time & Money: some facts
Renaat PhilippaertsDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences
1. Policy Research Centers
12 Policy Research Centers- according to the policy domains:
- Sport, physical activity and health,- Culture,- Tourism and leisure- Transportation,- Gender and equality,- Education, ...
- provide evidence-based knowledge to policy makers, ministers, …
1. Policy Research Centers
- Periods of 5 years:- 2001-2006, 2007-2011, …
- Consortium between universities, colleges, administrations and scientific institutions
- Budget over 5 years for each center- 4.000.000 – 5.000.000 €
Policy Research Center for Sport, Physical Activity and Health (SPAH)
supported by the Flemish Government(2001-2006: 4.214.200 euro)
1. Policy Research Centers
Theme I: Current status of physical activity, fitness and health in Flanders
Theme II: Associations between physical activity, fitness and health
Theme III: Development of intervention strategies for specific target groups (school, obese, internet use, elderly, …)
Theme IV: prevalence of injuries due to physical activity and sports
2. Frame of reference
Consensus model of Bouchard & Shephard, 1994
2. Frame of reference
Theme I: Current status of physical activity, fitness and health in Flanders
“Correct assessment of physical activity (PA) behavior and energy expenditure (EE) related to physical activity is essential to study the effects of physical activity on fitness and potential health benefits”
3. Computerised questionnaire
How to quantify physical activity?Physical activity is a complex concept, determined by different indicators:
– Frequency– Duration– Intensity
→ different methods
3. Computerised questionnaire
Activity energy expediture
‣Different activities contribute to AEE‧ PA during occupation‧ PA during leisure time – sport activities‧ Home and household activities‧ Transportation‧ Personal care
Renaat PhilippaertsDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences
3. Computerised questionnaire
Criterion methodsObjective methods- Heart rate monitoring (HRM)- Activity monitors (pedometers andaccelerometers) (AM)
- Combination of HRM and AM
3. Computerised questionnaire
Criterion methodsObjective methodsSubjective methods- Survey techniques (questionnaires)
- Self-reported- Paper and pencil- Electronic surveys
- Interviewer-assisted
3. Computerised questionnaire
Advantages paper-pencil Q:1. The only method feasible for a large
number of people2. Inexpensive3. Specific activities can be identified
together with frequency and duration (intensity?)
3. Computerised questionnaire
Advantages paper-pencil Q:4. Q does not influence the subject’s
activities5. Using energy tables: conversion to
AEE/ADMR6. Usable over a wide range of age7. Good reliability
3. Computerised questionnaire
Limitations paper-pencil Q:1. Recall their activities accurately?
- overstimation- underestimation
2. Questions are not clear3. Instrument is age and group specific4. Time consuming: encoding,
analyzing
3. Computerised questionnaire
Limitations paper-pencil Q:5. “human errors”6. Difficult to assess validity
3. Computerised questionnaire
Tecumseh/MinnesotaFive City/7 day recallBaeckeGodin-ShephardFraminghamLipid Research ClinicBaecke ModificationZutphen QYale PA QPASEAmsterdam Growth Study Q…IPAQ
?
3. Computerised questionnaire
Computerised questionnairesComputer delivered questionnaires…
What?Why?
3. Computerised questionnaire
Advantages:1. administration to a large number of
people simultaneously2. subjects cannot omit questions (no
missing data)3. software can skip superfluous
questions4. subjects report more honestly
undesirable behavior
3. Computerised questionnaire
Advantages:5. avoiding all sources of coding errors6. reducing hours of data entry: less
expensive7. explanation of difficult words or
questions by film clips
…and all advantages of P-P Q
3. Computerised questionnaire
Limitations:1. development of software (need of
technicians)2. development can be expensive3. dependent on hardware, server, …
3. Computerised questionnaire
Children-adolescents- McMurray RG et al., 1998, Med Sci SportsExerc 30: 1238-1245.
- Ridley K et al., 2001, Pediat Exerc Sci 13: 35-46.- Philippaerts RM et al., 2006, Int J Sports Med 27:131-136.
Adults- Vandelanotte C et al., 2005, Journal for Physical
Activity and Health 2 (1): 63-75.- Matton L et al., 2007, Res Quarterly Exerc Sport 78 (4): 293-
306.
BACKOFFICE
3. Computerised questionnaire
The concept of the FPACQ
- similar to IPAQ- specific sub-components- indication of intensity- calculation of EE by using METs- one single administrator
Renaat PhilippaertsDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences
3. Computerised questionnaire
-all data are directly saved and encoded
-additional variables are directlycalculated by the software
- immediate feedback is possible
The concept of the FPACQ
Renaat PhilippaertsDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences
3. Computerised questionnaire
- translation to other languages-pilot studies: reliability and validity in international context
[email protected]@faber.kuleuven.be
From FPACQ to IPACQ ??
Renaat PhilippaertsDepartment of Movement and Sports Sciences
4. Results
2001: Subjects (12-18 yrs)
N %
Girls 3738 61.1
Boys 2379 38.9
Total 6117 100Representative sample according to the different educational systems (free, state, official)
This study was supported by the Flemisch Agency for the promotion of Sport BLOSO
4. Results
2002-2004: Adults
46 communities (ad random)
28840 subjects (age 18-75) (ad random)22830 with known telephone number
18453 reached5170 participated
5170/18453 = 28%
4. Results
Boys 12-18 years
Girls 12-18 years
26,0
18,1
17,0
15,1
10,6
10,5
9,1
7,6
5,9
5,5
0 10 20 30 40 50
Basketbal
Volleybal
Turnen
Atletiek
Tennis
Paardensport
Fietssporten
Fitness
Zwemmen
Dansen
Percentage
Results: boys
Inactivity: TV and computer games
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: nsSES: L >< HAge x SES: ns
Results: girls
Inactivity: TV and computer games
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: **SES: L,M >< HAge x SES: ns
Results: boys
Passive transport (car, bus, train, …)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: **SES: nsAge x SES: ns
Results: girls
Passive transport (car, bus, train, …)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: **SES: L >< HAge x SES: ns
Results: boys
Sport participation leisure time: no differenceActive transport: no differenceTotal activity: no difference
Frequency moderate activities: no differenceFrequency heavy activities: no difference
Results: girls
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
Leisure time sport participation
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: nsSES: L >< M >< HAge x SES: *
Results: girls
6
8
10
12
14
16
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
Total activity (sports + active transport + school sports + PE)
age (yr)
hrs/wkAge: **SES: L >< M >< HAge x SES: ns
Results: girls
Frequency moderate activities
0
1
2
3
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
days/wkAge: **SES: L,M >< HAge x SES: **
Results: girls
Frequency heavy activities
0
1
2
3
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
lowmiddlehigh
age (yr)
n/wkAge: **SES: L,M >< HAge x SES: *
4. Results
In Flanders:
Boys are more physically active than girls
Girls are more prone to sedentary behavior
Physical activity declines with age in youth
Prevalence over Overweight25 > BMI <30
Prevalence of ObesitasBMI > 30
Health-related sport activity for age and gender
• > 1.5 h/week• > 3.5 MET’s (intensity)• according PA guidelines
%
Prevalence of sport inactivity(no sport activity at all)
%
4. Results
Sedentary behaviour
Prevalence of sedentarityPAL < 1.55 (kcal/kg/h or MET)
%
Prevalence of HypertensionSP > 140 mmHg or DP > 90 mmHg
%
Gestalte (cm)
Gewicht(kg)
BMI(kg/m2)
Vetpercentage(%)
LenigheidZittend reiken (cm)
Statische krachtHandknijpkracht (kg)
Wandeltest (m)
Systolische bloeddruk(mm Hg)
Diastolische bloeddruk(mm Hg)
Longinhoud(l)
Totaal cholesterol(mg/100ml)
Uren sport(u/week)
Kijkindex(u/week)
Profiel MANNEN 45-49 jaar
P10 P25 P50 P75 P90
170.0 172.0 176.0 180.0 186.0
109.0
22.2 23.9 25.5 28.5 31.6
70.0 73.0 80.0 89.0
30.5
8.0 14.0 21.0 27.0 32.0
15.2 19.1 23.0 26.6
62.035.0 42.0 49.0 56.0
703.8
116.0 120.7 130.0 140.0 150.0
521.0 557.5 612.4 685.5
95.3
3.9 4.3 4.9 5.4 6.0
73.3 78.7 82.0 90.0
265.0
0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 8.0
164.0 186.0 209.0 236.0
28.04.5 9.0 16.0 21.0
Recommendations to the policy
%
5. Time & Money: some facts
Budget epidemiological study2.000.000 € (2001-2006)
Subjects• PA: 6117 boys and girls: in a 3-month period• PA & PF & Health test battery: 5170 men and women: during ca. 50
weeks (about 100 subjects per week)
5. Time & Money: some facts
Staff:• 3 promotors• 1 director (on pay roll)• 1 administrator (on pay roll)• 1 test manager (on pay roll)• 3 PhD students (on pay roll)• Call center (1 year: 12 students) (on pay roll)• 4 physicians (free lance),• 2 nurses (free lance)• 8 part-time administrators and test leaders (on pay roll)• ca. 25 master students
Thank you !