Abstract
The significance of physical activity (PA) assessment is widely acknowledged as it can aid in the understanding of pathologies. PA of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) patients has been assessed with varying methods, as it is a disease that is known to impair physical function and activity during daily life. Differences between methods have been described for general outcomes (sport participation or sedentary time), yet failed to describe common activities such as stair locomotion or sit-to-stand (STS) transfers. This study therefore aimed to determine the comparability of various methods to assess daily-life activities in KOA patients.
Sixty-one clinically diagnosed KOA patients wore a tri-axial accelerometer (AX3, Axivity, UK) for one week during waking hours. Furthermore, they performed three physical function tests: a 40-m fast-paced walk test (WT), a timed up-and-go test (TUGT) and a 15 stair-climb test (SCT). Patients were also asked to fill out the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), a KOA-specific questionnaire.
Patients were slightly overweight (average BMI: 27.3±4.8 kg/m2), 60 (±10) years old and predominantly female (53%). The amount of daily level walking bouts was only weakly correlated with the WT performance, representing patients” walking capacity, (ρ=−0.33, p=0.01). Similarly, level-walking bouts during daily life correlated weakly with self-perceived walking capacity addressed by the KOOS (ρ=−0.36, p=0.01). For stair locomotion, a slightly different trend was seen. A moderate correlation was found (ρ=0.65, p<0.001), between the amount of ascending bouts and the objective functional test performance (SCT). However, the subjective assessment of stair ascending limitations (via the KOOS) correlated only weakly with both the functional test performance and the measured level of activity (ρ=−0.30 and −0.35, resp.). Comparable results were found for descending motions. STS transfers during daily life correlated moderately at best with the time to complete the TUGT (ρ=−0.43, p<0.01) and only weakly with the self-perceived effort of STS transfers (ρ=−0.26, p=0.04).
Only weak correlations existed between subjective measures and objective parameters (for both functional tests and daily living activities), indicating that they assess different domains (e.g. self-perceived function vs. actual physical function). Furthermore, when comparing the two objective measures, correlation coefficients increased compared to the subjective methods, yet did not reach strong agreement. These findings suggest that addressing common activities of daily life either subjectively or objectively will result in different patient-related outcomes of a study. Assessment methods should therefore be chosen with caution and compared carefully with other studies.
