RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE INDIAN VERSION OF THE PREGNANCY PHYSICAL ACTIVITY QUESTIONNAIRE (PPAQ)
- 1. Ph.D (Electrotherapy), Professor and Head, Department of Electrotherapy and Electrodiagnosis, School of Physiotherapy, D.Y Patil University, Mumbai, Maharashtra
- 2. Intern, School of Physiotherapy, D.Y Patil University, Mumbai, Maharashtra
Description
Purpose: The aim of this study was to translate the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire into regional languages of India i.e., Hindi and Marathi and test its reliability and validity among Indian pregnant women.
Subjects and Methods: The subjects were 60 healthy, single pregnant women of all three trimester between the age group of 18 and 40 who volunteered to participate in this study. The physical activity practices of all the consenting mothers from all the three trimesters were assessed using the Hindi and the Marathi version of PPAQ for three consecutive days. Reliability was evaluated by measuring the three day test-retest reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient and Spearman’s correlation analysis. Concurrent validity was examined by comparing the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire into Indian regional language i.e. Hindi and Marathi. Later Hindi and Marathi translated questionnaire were back translated into English. It was compared with the original PPAQ.
Results: The test-retest reliability, r values were respectively 0.987,0.956, 0.953 and 0.993 for self-reported sedentary, light, moderate, and vigorous activity, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient scores ranged from 0.965 to 0.999. For validity, the PPAQ were compared with the translated PPAQ.
Conclusion: The Indian version of the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for measurement of the physical activity level of pregnant women.
Files
158.PDF
Files
(263.8 kB)
| Name | Size | Download all |
|---|---|---|
|
md5:541d884526051c3275de1a07eb08a3ff
|
263.8 kB | Preview Download |
Additional details
References
- 1. Ferraro ZM, Gaudet L, Adamo KB. The potential impact of physical activity during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2012; 67(2):99–110. PMID: 22325300. doi: 10.1097/OGX.0b013e318242030e. 2. Nascimento SL, Surita FG, Cecatti JG. Physical exercise during pregnancy: A systematic review. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012; 24(6):387–94. PMID: 23014142. doi:10.1097/GCO.0b013e328359f131. 3. Pichard C, Melzer K, Kayser B (2004) Physical activity: the health benefits outweigh the risks. Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition and Metabolic Care 7: 641–647. 4. Garriguet D, Colley RC. A comparison of self-reported leisure-time physical activity and measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in adolescents and adults. Health Rep 2014; 25(7):3–11. PMID: 25029491. 5. Prince SA, Adamo KB, Hamel ME, Hardt J, Connor Gorber S, Tremblay M. A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: A systematic review. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2008; 5(1):56–80. PMID: 18990237. doi: 10.1186/1479-5868-5-56. 6. Butte N, Wong W, Treuth M, Ellis K, Smith E. Energy requirements during pregnancy based on total energy expenditure and energy deposition. Am J ClinNutr 2004; 79.1078-87. 7. Lof M, Forsum E. Activity pattern and energy expenditure due to physical activity before and during pregnancy in healthy Swedish women. Br J Nutr 2006; 95: 296-302. 8. Hegaard HK, Hedegaard M, Damm P, Ottesen B, Petersson K, Henriksen TB. Leisure time physical activity is associated with a reduced risk of preterm delivery. Am J ObstetGynecol2008; 198: 180e1-5. [Cited 2008 March 9. Available from: URL: http://www.ajog.org/article/S0002-9378(07)01023-X/fulltext 10. Helmerhorst HJ, Brage S, Warren J, et al.: A systematic review of reliability and objective criterion-related validity of physical activity questionnaires. Int J BehavNutr Phys Act, 2012, 9: 103. [Medline] [CrossRef] 11. Makabe S, Makimoto K, Kikkawa T, et al.: Reliability and validity of the Japanese version of the short questionnaire to assess health-enhancing physical activity (SQUASH) scale in older adults. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27: 517–522. [Medline] [Cross Ref] 12. Chasan-Taber L, Schmidt MD, Roberts DE, et al.: Development and validation of a Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2004, 36: 1750–1760. [Medline] [CrossRef] 13. Borodulin KM, Evenson KR, Wen F, et al.: Physical activity patterns during pregnancy. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 2008, 40: 1901–1908. [Medline] [Cross Ref] 14. Harrison CL, Thompson RG, Teede HJ, et al.: Measuring physical activity during pregnancy. Int J BehavNutr Phys Act, 2011, 8: 19. [Medline] [Cross Ref] 15. Ota E, Haruna M, Yanai H, et al.: Reliability and validity of the Vietnamese version of the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ). Southeast Asian J Trop Med Public Health, 2008, 39: 562–570. [Medline] 16. Chandonnet N, Saey D, Alméras N, et al.: French Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire compared with an accelerometer cut point to classify physical activity among pregnant obese women. PLoS ONE, 2012, 7: e38818. [Medline] [Cross Ref] 17. Matsuzaki M, Haruna M, Nakayama K, et al.: Adapting the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire for Japanese pregnant women. J ObstetGynecol Neonatal Nurs, 2014, 43: 107–116. [Medline] [Cross Ref] 18. YaseminÇirak, GülDeniz Yilmaz, et al.: Pregnancy physical activity questionnaire (PPAQ): reliability and validity of Turkish versionJ. Phys. Ther. Sci. 27: 3703–3709, 2015 19. Portney LG, Watkins MP: Foundations of clinical research: Applications to practice. East Norwalk CT: 3 ed. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey Pearson Prentice Hall.2009