Advertisement

Validity of the Exercise Vital Sign Tool to Assess Physical Activity

      Introduction

      Assessment and counseling by healthcare providers can successfully increase physical activity; however, a valid instrument to effectively measure physical activity is needed. This study examines the validity of the Exercise Vital Sign tool by comparing Exercise Vital Sign data collected at Kaiser Permanente Northwest with accelerometry data.

      Methods

      Participants (n=521) completed accelerometer monitoring and had ≥1 Exercise Vital Sign measurement in their electronic medical record. Using accelerometry as the gold standard, the association between moderate-to-vigorous physical activity minutes per week estimated through Exercise Vital Sign and that estimated through accelerometry was examined using the Spearman correlation coefficient. Comparability of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity categories (inactive, lowly active, moderately active, sufficiently active) was assessed using simple and weighted κ statistics. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. The study was conducted in 2012–2015, with analysis in 2019–2020.

      Results

      Average accelerometry-based moderate-to-vigorous physical activity was 212 minutes per week, and 57% of the participants were considered sufficiently active. Exercise Vital Sign‒based moderate-to-vigorous physical activity averaged 170 minutes per week, and 53% of the participants were active. There was a positive correlation between the moderate-to-vigorous physical activity minutes per week reported through Exercise Vital Sign and that reported through accelerometry (r =0.38, p<0.0001). A fair agreement was observed between Exercise Vital Sign‒ and accelerometry-based moderate-to-vigorous physical activity categories (weighted κ=0.29), with the highest agreement occurring for those with physical activity level ≥150 minutes per week. The positive correlation increased when moderate-to-vigorous physical activity was examined dichotomously (<150 or ≥150 minutes per week, κ=0.34). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for Exercise Vital Sign (when compared with those of accelerometry) were 67%, 68%, 61%, and 73%, respectively.

      Conclusions

      The Exercise Vital Sign is a useful physical activity assessment tool that correctly identifies the majority of adults who do and do not meet physical activity guidelines.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      REFERENCES

      1. Scientific report. Health.gov, HHS, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. https://health.gov/paguidelines/second-edition/report/. Updated January 27, 2020. Accessed December 4, 2018.

      2. Nutrition, physical activity, and obesity: data, trend and maps: data, trends and maps. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpao/data-trends-maps/index.html. Updated February 1, 2021. Accessed November 20, 2019.

        • Krist AH
        • Davidson KW
        • et al.
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
        Behavioral counseling interventions to promote a healthy diet and physical activity for cardiovascular disease prevention in adults with cardiovascular risk factors: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        JAMA. 2020; 324: 2069-2075https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.21749
        • Curry SJ
        • Krist AH
        • et al.
        • U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
        Behavioral weight loss interventions to prevent obesity-related morbidity and mortality in adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.
        JAMA. 2018; 320: 1163-1171https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.13022
      3. Increase the proportion of health care visits by adults with obesity that include counseling on weight loss, nutrition, or physical activity – NWS-05. HHS, Office of Disease Prevention and Health promotion.https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/browse-objectives/overweight-and-obesity/increase-proportion-health-care-visits-adults-obesity-include-counseling-weight-loss-nutrition-or-physical-activity-nws-05. Updated October 8, 2020. Accessed October 15, 2020.

        • Kraus WE
        • Bittner V
        • Appel L
        • et al.
        The National Physical Activity Plan: a call to action from the American Heart Association: a science advisory from the American Heart Association.
        Circulation. 2015; 131: 1932-1940https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000203
        • Sallis RE
        • Matuszak JM
        • Baggish AL
        • et al.
        Call to action on making physical activity assessment and prescription a medical standard of care.
        Curr Sports Med Rep. 2016; 15: 207-214https://doi.org/10.1249/JSR.0000000000000249
        • National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine
        Implementing Strategies to Enhance Public Health Surveillance of Physical Activity in the United States.
        The National Academies Press, Washington, DC2019https://doi.org/10.17226/25444
        • van Sluijs EM
        • van Poppel MN
        • Twisk JW
        • Chin A Paw MJ
        • Calfas KJ
        • van Mechelen W
        Effect of a tailored physical activity intervention delivered in general practice settings: results of a randomized controlled trial.
        Am J Public Health. 2005; 95: 1825-1831https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2004.044537
        • Goldstein MG
        • Pinto BM
        • Marcus BH
        • et al.
        Physician-based physical activity counseling for middle-aged and older adults: a randomized trial.
        Ann Behav Med. 1999; 21: 40-47https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02895032
        • Norris SL
        • Grothaus LC
        • Buchner DM
        • Pratt M.
        Effectiveness of physician-based assessment and counseling for exercise in a staff model HMO.
        Prev Med. 2000; 30: 513-523https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2000.0673
        • Grandes G
        • Sanchez A
        • Montoya I
        • Ortega Sanchez-Pinilla R
        • Torcal J
        • Group PEPAF
        Two-year longitudinal analysis of a cluster randomized trial of physical activity promotion by general practitioners.
        PLoS One. 2011; 6: e18363https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0018363
        • Coleman KJ
        • Ngor E
        • Reynolds K
        • et al.
        Initial validation of an exercise “vital sign” in electronic medical records.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012; 44: 2071-2076https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182630ec1
        • Young DR
        • Coleman KJ
        • Ngor E
        • Reynolds K
        • Sidell M
        • Sallis RE.
        Associations between physical activity and cardiometabolic risk factors assessed in a Southern California health care system, 2010‒2012.
        Prev Chronic Dis. 2014; 11: E219https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd11.140196
        • Fitzgerald L
        • Ozemek C
        • Jarrett H
        • Kaminsky LA.
        Accelerometer validation of questionnaires used in clinical settings to assess MVPA.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2015; 47: 1538-1542https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000565
        • Joseph RP
        • Keller C
        • Adams MA
        • Ainsworth BE.
        Validity of two brief physical activity questionnaires with accelerometers among African-American women.
        Prim Health Care Res Dev. 2016; 17: 265-276https://doi.org/10.1017/S1463423615000390
        • Frank LD
        • Kuntz JL
        • Chapman JE
        • et al.
        The health and economic effects of light rail lines: design, methods, and protocol for a natural experiment.
        BMC Public Health. 2019; 19: 200https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6518-6
      4. Leo MC, Lindberg NM, Vesco KK, Stevens VJ. Validity of medical chart weights and heights for obese pregnant women. EGEMS (Wash DC). 2014;2(1):1051. https://doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1051.

        • Smith N
        • Coleman KJ
        • Lawrence JM
        • et al.
        Body weight and height data in electronic medical records of children.
        Int J Pediatr Obes. 2010; 5: 237-242https://doi.org/10.3109/17477160903268308
        • Charlson ME
        • Pompei P
        • Ales KL
        • MacKenzie CR.
        A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.
        J Chronic Dis. 1987; 40: 373-383https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8
        • Jarrett H
        • Fitzgerald L
        • Routen AC.
        Interinstrument reliability of the ActiGraph GT3X+ ambulatory activity monitor during free-living conditions in adults.
        J Phys Act Health. 2015; 12: 382-387https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.2013-0070
        • Santos-Lozano A
        • Marín PJ
        • Torres-Luque G
        • Ruiz JR
        • Lucía A
        • Garatachea N.
        Technical variability of the GT3X accelerometer.
        Med Eng Phys. 2012; 34: 787-790https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2012.02.005
        • John D
        • Freedson P.
        ActiGraph and Actical physical activity monitors: a peek under the hood.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012; 44: S86-S89https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182399f5e
        • Troiano RP
        • Berrigan D
        • Dodd KW
        • Mâsse LC
        • Tilert T
        • McDowell M.
        Physical activity in the United States measured by accelerometer.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2008; 40: 181-188https://doi.org/10.1249/mss.0b013e31815a51b3
        • Hastings Jr C
        • Mosteller F
        • Tukey JW
        • Winsor CP
        Low moments for small samples: a comparative study of order statistics.
        Ann Math Stat. 1947; 18: 413-426https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177730388
        • Cleland CL
        • Hunter RF
        • Kee F
        • Cupples ME
        • Sallis JF
        • Tully MA.
        Validity of the global physical activity questionnaire (GPAQ) in assessing levels and change in moderate-vigorous physical activity and sedentary behaviour.
        BMC Public Health. 2014; 14: 1255https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-1255
        • Smith TO
        • McKenna MC
        • Salter C
        • et al.
        A systematic review of the physical activity assessment tools used in primary care.
        Fam Pract. 2017; 34: 384-391https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmx011
        • Meriwether RA
        • McMahon PM
        • Islam N
        • Steinmann WC.
        Physical activity assessment: validation of a clinical assessment tool.
        Am J Prev Med. 2006; 31: 484-491https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2006.08.021
        • Pereira MA
        • FitzerGerald SJ
        • Gregg EW
        • et al.
        A collection of Physical Activity Questionnaires for health-related research.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1997; 29: S1-S205
      5. Surveillance systems.
        Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, September 19, 2017 (Updated)
      6. Physical activity self-report measures Descriptions. Physical Activity Resource Center for Public Health. http://www.parcph.org/subjDefList.aspx. Accessed June 1, 2020.

        • Ainsworth BE
        • Caspersen CJ
        • Matthews CE
        • Mâsse LC
        • Baranowski T
        • Zhu W.
        Recommendations to improve the accuracy of estimates of physical activity derived from self report.
        J Phys Act Health. 2012; 9: S76-S84https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.9.s1.s76
        • Sternfeld B
        • Goldman-Rosas L.
        A systematic approach to selecting an appropriate measure of self-reported physical activity or sedentary behavior.
        J Phys Act Health. 2012; 9: S19-S28https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.9.s1.s19
        • Golightly YM
        • Allen KD
        • Ambrose KR
        • et al.
        Physical activity as a vital sign: a systematic review.
        Prev Chronic Dis. 2017; 14: E123https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd14.170030
        • Wald A
        • Garber CE.
        A review of current literature on vital sign assessment of physical activity in primary care.
        J Nurs Scholarsh. 2018; 50: 65-73https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12351
        • Haskell WL.
        Physical activity by self-report: a brief history and future issues.
        J Phys Act Health. 2012; 9: S5-S10https://doi.org/10.1123/jpah.9.s1.s5
        • Troiano RP
        • McClain JJ
        • Brychta RJ
        • Chen KY.
        Evolution of accelerometer methods for physical activity research.
        Br J Sports Med. 2014; 48: 1019-1023https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2014-093546
        • Wanner M
        • Probst-Hensch N
        • Kriemler S
        • Meier F
        • Autenrieth C
        • Martin BW.
        Validation of the long international physical activity questionnaire: influence of age and language region.
        Prev Med Rep. 2016; 3: 250-256https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.03.003
        • Sternfeld B
        • Gabriel KP
        • Jiang SF
        • et al.
        Risk estimates for diabetes and hypertension with different physical activity methods.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2019; 51: 2498-2505https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000002083
        • Dyrstad SM
        • Hansen BH
        • Holme IM
        • Anderssen SA.
        Comparison of self-reported versus accelerometer-measured physical activity.
        Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2014; 46: 99-106https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0b013e3182a0595f