Translation and cultural adaptation of the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire into Danish using the dual-panel approach: comparison with outcomes from an alternative translation approach.

OBJECTIVE: Physical activity reduces the risk of pregnancy-related complications. However, pregnant women often reduce their physical activity levels and do not follow the WHO's physical activity recommendations during pregnancy. To support pregnant women in monitoring physical activity, the self-administered Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire was developed in the US. We translated and cross-cultural adapted the questionnaire using the dual approach method. Meanwhile, and without knowing this, another Danish group simultaneously translated the questionnaire using the method described by Beaton et al. The aim is to present our data and discuss the unplanned purpose of comparing the results from using two different translation methods. RESULTS: We translated and cross-culturally adapted the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire to Danish with the following findings. Two additional items for cycling were included. Three items about spending time on a computer, reading, writing or talking on the phone were not feasible in terms of differentiating between them and these were merged into one item. The item 'Taking care of an older adult' was found to be irrelevant in a Danish setting and was removed. Adaptions were similar comparing the two methods. Consequently, using the dual-panel and the methods suggested by Beaton et al. yield similar results when translating and cultural adapting the PPAQ.

Measurement latency significantly contributes to reduced heart rate measurement accuracy in wearable devices.

The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which measurement latency has significance for the accuracy of heart rate (HR) measured by wearable devices during physical activities. Thirty participants (15 female) aged 18-50 years (mean 24.8, 6.3 SD years) with weight ranging from 53-87 kg (mean 70.5, 9.4 SD kg) participated in this cross-sectional study. Participants completed three submaximal exercise conditions; cycling, treadmill walking/running and rapid arm movements. During the exercises, HR was concurrently measured using the Polar H10 (PL), the Apple Watch 2 (AW) and the Garmin Forerunner 235 (GF). Measurement latency significantly affected the discrepancy in HR measures and measurement latency accounted for 15% (GF) and 2% (AW) of the explained discrepancy in HR between the criterion measure PL and the GF and AW. However, the findings also showed that the magnitude of HR measurement latency differed notably among the two wearable devices and measurement latency was greatly influenced not only by type but also by the intensity of exercise. These findings contribute to our understanding of wearable device HR measures discrepancy and this knowledge may be of assistance when electing to use wearable devices to monitor physical exertion in different contexts.

Accuracy of the wearable activity tracker Garmin Forerunner 235 for the assessment of heart rate during rest and activity.

Accurate measures of heart rate (HR) during rehabilitation and sporting activities are important for precise exercise prescription to maintain or increase capacity. Wrist-worn activity monitors utilizing photoplethysmography technology (PPG) to configure HR show discrepant findings regarding validity depending on the type and intensity of exercises measured, and no previous study has yet investigated the accuracy during running at speeds exceeding 9.6 km/h. The purpose of the study was to assess the accuracy of the Garmin Forerunner 235 (GF), at different exercises at various intensities. Twenty-nine participants participated in the study. HR was measured with the (GF) during rest and three submaximal exercise conditions; cycling, treadmill walking, running and rapid arm movements. The GF had high agreement with the PL during rest (r = 0.997) cycling at 150 W (Rho = 0.889), treadmill running at 8.7 km/h (r = 0.906) and 12.1 km/h (r = 0.845) and rapid arm movements (r = 0.928, r = 0.745) but a low agreement during cycling at 50 W (Rho = 0.269) and 100W (Rho = 0.462) and treadmill walking at 4.8 km/h (r = 0.481). The results varied across exercise conditions and intensities and although the GF provided accurate measurements of HR during rest, cycling at 150W, treadmill running, and rapid arm movement measurement latency may potentially affect application.