The German version of the Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire: a translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity assessment.

BACKGROUND: Validated and internationally standardised measurement instruments are a prerequisite for ensuring that physical activity during pregnancy is comparable and for deriving physical activity recommendations. In Germany, there has been no adapted version of the internationally used Pregnancy Physical Activity Questionnaire (PPAQ) until now. This study's aim centred around translating the original English version into German (PPAQ-G) and determining its reliability as well as validity in a German population. METHODS: The PPAQ was translated into German using the forward-backwards technique. Its reliability and validity were tested. Thirty-four correctly completed questionnaires were analysed. The test-retest reliability was presented using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Spearman correlation coefficient. Validity was tested by using accelerometer (n = 23) and determined by Spearman correlation coefficient. RESULTS: In the transcultural adjustment, two questions were amended to describe intensity more precisely, and two other questions were adapted to reflect the units of measurement used in Germany. The ICC indicated a reliability of r = 0.79 for total activity (without sitting), and the intensity subcategories ranged from r = 0.70 (moderate-intensity activities) to r = 0.90 (sitting). Although, validity assessment showed no significant correlation for sedentary, moderate or vigorous intensity, there were significant correlations for total activity (light and above; r = 0.49; p < 0.05) and for light activity (r = 0.65; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The PPAQ-G showed good reliability for use on pregnant German women and a moderately accurate measurement of physical activity. It can be used nationally for epidemiological studies, and it also enables international comparisons of physical activity during pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: DRKS00023426; Registration date 20 May 2021.

Communication strategies in the prevention of type 2 diabetes and gestational diabetes in vulnerable groups: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of diabetes is nearly 9%, with an upward trend in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and gestational diabetes (GDM). Although evidence shows that vulnerable groups are affected disproportionally, these groups are difficult to reach in terms of preventive measures. Currently, there is no gold standard regarding communication strategies and/or public awareness campaigns. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review in September 2019. Two reviewers independently screened the results of the electronic literature search in several databases, including Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO. Extracted data were charted, categorized, and summarized. RESULTS: All of the included articles (n=24) targeted T2DM; none targeted GDM. We identified the following five different vulnerable groups within the identified studies: migrants (n=9), ethnic groups such as African Americans (n=8), people with low socioeconomic status (n=3), older people (n=1), and people in need of care (n=1). Three categories of communication strategies were identified as follows: adapted diabetes prevention programs (n=21), community health workers (n=5), and technical approaches (n=9). CONCLUSION: We found different approaches for preventive interventions for T2DM. Some of these approaches were already adapted to known barriers. Communication strategies should be adapted to barriers and facilitating factors to increase participation and motivation.

Barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of diabetes type 2 and gestational diabetes in vulnerable groups: A scoping review.

AIMS: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and gestational diabetes (GDM) are globally on the rise, accompanied by comorbidities and associated health costs. Increased physical activity, healthy nutrition, and weight loss have shown the potential to prevent T2DM/GDM. Despite this, reaching vulnerable groups remains a key challenge. The aim of this scoping review was to identify barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of T2DM/GDM in vulnerable groups. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature search in May 2018, updated in September 2019, in several databases (e.g. PubMed, Embase) to identify barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of T2DM/GDM in vulnerable groups. Two reviewers independently screened the results. Extracted data was charted, categorized, and summarized. RESULTS: We included 125 articles. Ninety-eight studies were extracted, and eight categories of barriers and facilitating factors were formed. The most common categories of barriers were limited knowledge, family/friends, and economic factors, and the most common categories of facilitating factors were family/friends, social support, and knowledge. CONCLUSION: This scoping review identified various barriers and facilitating factors in vulnerable groups. Preventive interventions should consider these barriers and facilitating factors in developing preventive interventions or in adapting existing ones.

Communication strategies in the prevention of type 2 and gestational diabetes in vulnerable groups: protocol for a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: The global prevalence of diabetes mellitus is nearly 9%, with an upward trend in type 2 and gestational diabetes mellitus (T2DM/GDM). Evidence shows that vulnerable groups are affected disproportionally. Therefore, there is an increasing need to implement policies to prevent risk factors for T2DM/GDM and to promote a healthy lifestyle. However, up to now, no gold standard in terms of communication strategies and/or public awareness campaigns is known. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a systematic scoping review to evaluate communication strategies in the prevention of T2DM/GDM in vulnerable groups. Two reviewers will independently screen the results of the electronic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Social Science Citation Index, and CINAHL. Extracted data will be charted, categorized, and summarized. DISCUSSION: The results will be used to inform the National education and communication strategy on diabetes mellitus in Germany. In particular, the results will be discussed in focus groups of experts to develop recommendations for communication strategies. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO does not register scoping reviews.

Correction to: Barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of diabetes type II and gestational diabetes in vulnerable groups: protocol for a scoping review.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors reported an error in Table 1 as the wrong table was used.

Barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of diabetes type II and gestational diabetes in vulnerable groups: protocol for a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There is a significant worldwide increase in type 2 diabetes mellitus and gestational diabetes (T2DM/GDM) linked to a range of associated comorbidities and rising healthcare costs. It has been shown that an increase in physical activity, healthy nutrition, and weight loss may prevent or delay T2DM/GDM manifestation. Despite this, it remains a key challenge to reach various populations, in particular so-called vulnerable groups, mostly with a migration background and/or low socio-economic status. METHODS/DESIGN: We will conduct a scoping review to identify barriers and facilitating factors in the prevention of T2DM/GDM in vulnerable groups. An electronic literature search will be performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, Social Science Citation Index, and CINAHL. Two reviewers will independently select studies for inclusion. Extracted data will be charted, categorized, and summarized. DISCUSSION: The results will be used to inform the National education and communication strategy on diabetes mellitus in Germany. In particular, the results will be discussed in focus groups of experts to develop recommendations for developing preventive measures targeting vulnerable groups. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO does not register scoping reviews.