Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for

  • Author: Patricia W. Bauer x
Clear All Modify Search
Restricted access

Patricia W. Bauer, James M. Pivarnik, Deborah L. Feltz, Nigel Paneth and Christopher J. Womack

Background:

Physical activity (PA) is an important component of a healthy pregnancy and postpartum period. Since prospective PA monitoring throughout gestation is difficult, a valid PA recall tool would be of significant benefit to researchers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of women to recall their physical activity performed during pregnancy and postpartum, 6 years later.

Methods:

Thirty women participated in an historical PA recall study. Pregnancy PA was monitored carefully via assisted physical activity diary (PAD) 6 years before the current investigation. A Modifiable Activity Questionnaire (MAQ) was used to assess current and past pregnancy PA. The MAQ was administered for each time period in the order of most distant past to most current. Leisure time energy expenditure values (kcal/kg/day) calculated from the PAD and the MAQ were compared.

Results:

MAQ energy expenditure values showed good positive relationships with PAD measures at 20 weeks gestation (r = .57; P < .01), 32 weeks gestation (r = .85; P < .01), and 12 weeks postpartum (r = .86; P < .01). Correlations found were similar to those from previous PA recall and MAQ validation studies using nonpregnant populations.

Conclusions:

The MAQ is an appropriate tool to assess pregnancy and postpartum PA in women 6 years postpartum.

Restricted access

Patricia W. Bauer, James M. Pivarnik, Willa C. Fornetti, Jennifer J. Jallo and Lawrence Nassar

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate three bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) prediction models for fat-free mass (FFM) using the U.S. National Women’s Gymnastics team (N = 48; age = 15.8 ± 1.8 years). One model had been developed recently using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) as the criterion measure, whereas the other two used hydrodensitometry. In this investigation, FFM predictions were compared with measures obtained via DEXA. FFM measured by DEXA averaged 40.5 ± 7.4 kg (± SD), whereas values generated using the three BIA models were within 0.8 kg of this actual measure. Validity coefficients for all models were high (Rxy = .95-98). FFM prediction error was lowest with the model using DEXA as the criterion measure (1.3 kg) compared with the other two (1.9 and 2.4 kg). All BIA models underpredicted FFM in the heaviest girls, and the Lohman and Van Loan et al. models overpredicted FFM in the lightest girls. Whereas prediction error was significantly correlated to the girls’ bone mineral density in all BIA models, this relationship was strongest in the two that were developed using hydrodensitometry.