摘要
目的 对加速度计(CSA)测量成年人日常体力活动的效度进行验证并提出根据 CSA数据预测能量消耗的方程。方法 选取 72 名北京市居民,年龄(43.6±4.0)岁,男性 33 名,女性 39名,作为调查对象,佩带7天CSA,在同一期间采用双标水方法(DLW) 测量能量消耗,包括平均每天总能量消耗(TEE)、平均每天体力活动能量消耗(AEE)和体力活动水平(PAL)作为验证标准。结果通过CSA测量的平均每天活动计数(AC)与TEE、AEE和PAL之间均呈显著相关,偏相关系数 r 分别为0.31、0.30、0.26(P<0.05)。逐步多元回归分析表明,影响TEE的因素包括去脂体重或体重指数、AC(R2=0.52~0.70),影响AEE的因素包括AC、性别和去脂体重(R2=0.25~0.32)。结论 CSA能准确测量中国成年人日常体力活动模式,AC可以解释TEE和AEE的变异。
Objective Using doubly labeled water method to validate the colmputer science (application's) activity monitor(CSA) in assessing physical activity of free-living adults in Beijing, in order to develop equations to predict total daily energy expenditure(TEE) and activity related energy expenditure(AEE) from activity counts(AC) and anthropometric variables. Methods A total of 72 healthy adults(33 males and 39 females, mean age (43.6±)(4.0) yr) were monitored for 7 consecutive days by CSA. TEE was simultaneously measured using doubly labeled water method. Average AC(counts/min^(-1)) was compared with TEE, AEE and physical activity level (PAL). Results Physical activity determined by AC was significantly related to data on energy expenditures: TEE((r=)(0.31),(P<)(0.01)), AEE((r=)(0.30),(P<)(0.05)), and PAL((r=)(0.26),(P<)(0.05)). Multiple stepwise regression analysis showed that TEE was significantly influenced by gender, fat-free mass(FFM) or BMI and AC ((R^2=)(0.52-)(0.70)) while AEE was significantly influenced by gender, FFM and AC((R^2=)(0.25-)(0.32)). Conclusion AC from CSA activity monitor seemed a useful measure in studying the total amount of physical activity in free-living adults while AC significantly contributed to the explained variation in TEE and AEE.
出处
《中华流行病学杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2005年第3期197-200,共4页
Chinese Journal of Epidemiology
