Dataset Information

Direct healthcare costs associated with device assessed and self-reported physical activity: results from a cross-sectional population-based study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Physical inactivity (PIA) is an important risk factor for many chronic conditions and therefore might increase healthcare utilization and costs. This study aimed to analyze the association of PIA using device assessed and self-reported physical activity (PA) data with direct healthcare costs.

Methods

Cross-sectional data was retrieved from the population based KORA FF4 study (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg) that was conducted in southern Germany from 2013 to 2014 (n?=?2279). Self-reported PA was assessed with two questions regarding sports related PA in summer and winter and categorized into "high activity", "moderate activity", "low activity" and "no activity". In a subsample (n?=?477), PA was assessed with accelerometers and participants were categorized into activity quartiles ("very high", "high", "low" and "very low") according to their mean minutes per day spent in light intensity, or in moderate-vigorous PA (MVPA). Self-reported healthcare utilization was used to estimate direct healthcare costs. We regressed direct healthcare costs on PA using a two-part gamma regression, adjusted for age, sex and socio-demographic variables. Additional models, including and excluding potential additional confounders and effect mediators were used to check the robustness of the results.

Results

Annual direct healthcare costs of individuals who reported no sports PA did not differ from those who reported high sports PA [+€189, 95% CI: -188, 598]. In the subsample with accelerometer data, participants with very low MVPA had significantly higher annual costs than participants with very high MVPA [+€986, 95% CI: 15, 1982].

Conclusion

Device assessed but not self-reported PIA was associated with higher direct healthcare costs. The magnitude and significance of the association depended on the choice of covariates in the regression models. Larger studies with device assessed PA and longitudinal design are needed to be able to better quantify the impact of PIA on direct healthcare costs.

SUBMITTER: Karl FM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6090754 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Direct healthcare costs associated with device assessed and self-reported physical activity: results from a cross-sectional population-based study.

Karl Florian M FM Tremmel Maximilian M Luzak Agnes A Schulz Holger H Peters Annette A Meisinger Christa C Holle Rolf R Laxy Michael M

BMC public health 20180803 1

<h4>Background</h4>Physical inactivity (PIA) is an important risk factor for many chronic conditions and therefore might increase healthcare utilization and costs. This study aimed to analyze the association of PIA using device assessed and self-reported physical activity (PA) data with direct healthcare costs.<h4>Methods</h4>Cross-sectional data was retrieved from the population based KORA FF4 study (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg) that was conducted in southern Germany f ...[more]

PMID: 30075768

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn the absence of electronic health records, analysis of direct healthcare costs often relies on resource utilisation data collected from patient-reported surveys. This scoping review explored the availability, use and methodological details of self-reported healthcare service utilisation and cost data to assess healthcare costs in Ireland.MethodsPopulation health surveys were identified from Irish data repositories and details were collated in an inventory to inform the literature search. Irish cost studies published in peer-reviewed and grey sources from 2009 to 2019 were included if they used self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost. Two independent researchers extracted studies' details and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines were used for reporting.ResultsIn total, 27 surveys were identified containing varying details of healthcare utilisation/cost, health status, demographic characteristics and health-related risk and behaviour. Of those surveys, 21 were general population surveys and six were study-specific ad-hoc surveys. Furthermore, 14 cost studies were identified which used retrospective self-reported data on healthcare utilisation or cost from ten of the identified surveys. Nine of these cost studies used ad-hoc surveys and five used data from pre-existing population surveys. Compared to population surveys, ad-hoc surveys contained more detailed information on resource use, albeit with smaller sample sizes. Recall periods ranged from 1 week for frequently used services to 1 year for rarer service use, or longer for once-off costs. A range of perspectives (societal, healthcare and public sector) and costing approaches (bottom-up costing and a mix of top-down and bottom-up) were used. The majority of studies (n = 11) determined unit prices using multiple sources, including national healthcare tariffs, literature and expert views. Moreover, most studies (n = 13) reported limitations concerning data availability, risk of bias and generalisability. Various sampling, data collection and analysis strategies were employed to minimise these.ConclusionPopulation surveys can aid cost assessments in jurisdictions that lack electronic health records, unique patient identifiers and data interoperability. To increase utilisation, researchers wanting to conduct cost analyses need to be aware of and have access to existing data sources. Future population surveys should be designed to address reported limitations and capture comprehensive health-related, demographic and resource use data.

Project description:BackgroundSelf-reported scales and objective measurement tools are used to evaluate self-perceived and objective knowledge of evidence-based practice (EBP). Agreement between self-perceived and objective knowledge of EBP terminology has not been widely investigated among healthcare students.AimThe aim of this study was to examine agreement between self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of EBP terminology among healthcare students. A secondary objective was to explore this agreement between students with different levels of EBP exposure.MethodsStudents in various healthcare disciplines and at different academic levels from Norway (n = 336) and Canada (n = 154) were invited to answer the Terminology domain items of the Evidence-Based Practice Profile (EBP2) questionnaire (self-reported), an additional item of 'evidence based practice' and six random open-ended questions (objective). The open-ended questions were scored on a five-level scoring rubric. Interrater agreement between self-reported and objective items was investigated with weighted kappa (Kw). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to estimate overall agreement.ResultsMean self-reported scores varied across items from 1.99 ('forest plot') to 4.33 ('evidence-based practice'). Mean assessed open-ended answers varied from 1.23 ('publication bias') to 2.74 ('evidence-based practice'). For all items, mean self-reported knowledge was higher than that assessed from open-ended answers (p<0.001). Interrater agreement between self-reported and assessed open-ended items varied (Kw = 0.04-0.69). The overall agreement for the EBP2 Terminology domain was poor (ICC = 0.29). The self-reported EBP2 Terminology domain discriminated between levels of EBP exposure.ConclusionAn overall low agreement was found between healthcare students' self-reported and objectively assessed knowledge of EBP terminology. As a measurement tool, the EBP2 Terminology scale may be useful to differentiate between levels of EBP exposure. When using the scale as a discriminatory tool, for the purpose of academic promotion or clinical certification, users should be aware that self-ratings would be higher than objectively assessed knowledge.

Project description:BackgroundAs children show a more complex but less structured movement behavior than adults, assessment of their many spontaneous and impulsive movements is a challenge for physical activity (PA) assessment. Since neither questionnaires nor accelerometers enable optimal detection of all facets of PA, a multimodal, combined approach of self-reported and device-based methods is recommended. Based on the number of days on which the participants reached the physical activity (PA) values given in the WHO guideline, this study examines 1) the difference between self-reported and device-based, measured PA and 2) whether PA differences between age and gender groups obtained by two methods are comparable.MethodsParticipants aged 6-17 years were randomly chosen and data were collected representatively at 167 sample points throughout Germany within the Motorik-Modul Study. PA of n = 2694 participants (52.3% female) was measured using the ActiGraph accelerometer (ACC) and a physical activity questionnaire (PAQ). The sample was divided into three age groups (6-10 yrs. n = 788, 11-13 yrs. n = 823, 14-17 yrs. n = 1083). Numbers of days per week with at least 60 min moderate to vigorous PA (MVPA) were analyzed for both methods.ResultsOnly every 25th respondent (4%) reaches the WHO standard of 60 min MVPA every day if measured with ACC. Self-reported PA was slightly higher (9%) (meanPAQ = 3.82 days; meanACC = 2.34 days; Fmethod = 915.85; p = <.001; fCohen = .64). The differences between the methods are significantly smaller in younger children than in the older age groups (Fage = 264.2, p < .001; fCohen = .48). The older the subjects are, the lower is the proportion of those who meet the WHO guideline on each day, with girls meeting the guideline less frequently than boys in all age groups.ConclusionChildren and adolescents living in Germany show a very low adherence to the WHO guideline on PA. While younger children are much more active with their free play, especially children over 10 years of age and especially girls should be the target of programs to increase PA.

Project description:ObjectivesAutistic people experience poor physical and mental health along with reduced life expectancy compared with non-autistic people. Our aim was to identify self-reported barriers to primary care access by autistic adults compared with non-autistic adults and to link these barriers to self-reported adverse health consequences.DesignFollowing consultation with the autistic community at an autistic conference, Autscape, we developed a self-report survey, which we administered online through social media platforms.SettingA 52-item, international, online survey.Participants507 autistic adults and 157 non-autistic adults.Primary and secondary outcome measuresSelf-reported barriers to accessing healthcare and associated adverse health outcomes.ResultsEighty per cent of autistic adults and 37% of non-autistic respondents reported difficulty visiting a general practitioner (GP). The highest-rated barriers by autistic adults were deciding if symptoms warrant a GP visit (72%), difficulty making appointments by telephone (62%), not feeling understood (56%), difficulty communicating with their doctor (53%) and the waiting room environment (51%). Autistic adults reported a preference for online or text-based appointment booking, facility to email in advance the reason for consultation, the first or last clinic appointment and a quiet place to wait. Self-reported adverse health outcomes experienced by autistic adults were associated with barriers to accessing healthcare. Adverse outcomes included untreated physical and mental health conditions, not attending specialist referral or screening programmes, requiring more extensive treatment or surgery due to late presentations and untreated potentially life-threatening conditions. There were no significant differences in difficulty attending, barriers experienced or adverse outcomes between formally diagnosed and self-identified autistic respondents.ConclusionsReduction of healthcare inequalities for autistic people requires that healthcare providers understand autistic perspectives, communication needs and sensory sensitivities. Adjustments for autism-specific needs are as necessary as ramps for wheelchair users.

Project description:Understanding the sources of the large individual differences in sedentary behavior is of great importance as this behavior is associated with pre-mature mortality and non-communicable diseases. Here, we report on the contribution of genetic and environmental factors to the variation in objectively assessed (accelerometer) sedentary behavior and self-reported sitting and their shared genetic basis. In addition, the overlap of the genetic risk factors influencing sedentary time and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was estimated. A sample of 800 individuals (twins and their siblings) was equipped with an Actigraph accelerometer for 7 days and reported on their sitting time and time spent on MVPA on those days using the IPAQ-SF. Genetic factors explained 56% (CI: 44%, 65%) of the individual differences in objective sedentary behavior (Actigraph) and 26% (CI: 0%, 51%) of the individual differences in self-reported sedentary behavior (IPAQ-SF). A modest correlation (0.33) was found between these measures, which was for 45% accounted for by genetic influences. The genetic correlation was 0.49 reflecting a partly overlapping set of genes that influenced both measurements. A modest correlation (-0.27) between Actigraph-derived sedentary time and MVPA was found, which was 13% accounted for by genetic effects. The genetic correlation was -0.31, indicating that there are overlapping genetic variants that increase sedentary time and decrease MVPA or vice versa. To conclude, more than half of the individual differences in objective sedentary time could be attributed to genetic differences, while for self-reported sitting this was much lower. In addition, using objective measurements, this study confirms that sedentary time is not simply the inverse of MVPA. Future studies are needed to understand the pathways translating genomic variation into variation in these behaviors and how this knowledge might feed into the development of health promotion interventions.

Dataset Information

Direct healthcare costs associated with device assessed and self-reported physical activity: results from a cross-sectional population-based study.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Direct healthcare costs associated with device assessed and self-reported physical activity: results from a cross-sectional population-based study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets