Dataset Information

Association of Step Volume and Intensity With All-Cause Mortality in Older Women.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

A goal of 10?000 steps/d is commonly believed by the public to be necessary for health, but this number has limited scientific basis. Additionally, it is unknown whether greater stepping intensity is associated with health benefits, independent of steps taken per day.

Objective

To examine associations of number of steps per day and stepping intensity with all-cause mortality.

Design, setting, and participants

This prospective cohort study included 18?289 US women from the Women's Health Study who agreed to participate by wearing an accelerometer during waking hours for 7 days between 2011 and 2015. A total of 17?708 women wore and returned their devices; data were downloaded successfully from 17?466 devices. Of these women, 16?741 were compliant wearers (?10 h/d of wear on ?4 days) and included in the analyses, which took place between 2018 and 2019.

Exposures

Steps per day and several measures of stepping intensity (ie, peak 1-minute cadence; peak 30-minute cadence; maximum 5-minute cadence; time spent at a stepping rate of ?40 steps/min, reflecting purposeful steps).

Main outcomes and measures

All-cause mortality.

Results

Of the 16?741 women who met inclusion criteria, the mean (SD) age was 72.0 (5.7) years. Mean step count was 5499 per day, with 51.4%, 45.5%, and 3.1% of time spent at 0, 1 to 39 (incidental steps), and 40 steps/min or greater (purposeful steps), respectively. During a mean follow-up of 4.3 years, 504 women died. Median steps per day across low-to-high quartiles of distribution were 2718, 4363, 5905, and 8442, respectively. The corresponding quartile hazard ratios (HRs) associated with mortality and adjusted for potential confounders were 1.00 (reference), 0.59 (95% CI, 0.47-0.75), 0.54 (95% CI, 0.41-0.72), and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.30-0.60), respectively (P??.05).

Conclusions and relevance

Among older women, as few as approximately 4400 steps/d was significantly related to lower mortality rates compared with approximately 2700 steps/d. With more steps per day, mortality rates progressively decreased before leveling at approximately 7500 steps/d. Stepping intensity was not clearly related to lower mortality rates after accounting for total steps per day.

SUBMITTER: Lee IM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6547157 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Step Volume and Intensity With All-Cause Mortality in Older Women.

Lee I-Min IM Shiroma Eric J EJ Kamada Masamitsu M Bassett David R DR Matthews Charles E CE Buring Julie E JE

JAMA internal medicine 20190801 8

<h4>Importance</h4>A goal of 10 000 steps/d is commonly believed by the public to be necessary for health, but this number has limited scientific basis. Additionally, it is unknown whether greater stepping intensity is associated with health benefits, independent of steps taken per day.<h4>Objective</h4>To examine associations of number of steps per day and stepping intensity with all-cause mortality.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This prospective cohort study included 18 289 US women ...[more]

PMID: 31141585

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:It is unclear whether the number of steps per day and the intensity of stepping are associated with lower mortality. Objective:Describe the dose-response relationship between step count and intensity and mortality. Design, Setting, and Participants:Representative sample of US adults aged at least 40 years in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey who wore an accelerometer for up to 7 days ( from 2003-2006). Mortality was ascertained through December 2015. Exposures:Accelerometer-measured number of steps per day and 3 step intensity measures (extended bout cadence, peak 30-minute cadence, and peak 1-minute cadence [steps/min]). Accelerometer data were based on measurements obtained during a 7-day period at baseline. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs), mortality rates, and 95% CIs were estimated using cubic splines and quartile classifications adjusting for age; sex; race/ethnicity; education; diet; smoking status; body mass index; self-reported health; mobility limitations; and diagnoses of diabetes, stroke, heart disease, heart failure, cancer, chronic bronchitis, and emphysema. Results:A total of 4840 participants (mean age, 56.8 years; 2435 [54%] women; 1732 [36%] individuals with obesity) wore accelerometers for a mean of 5.7 days for a mean of 14.4 hours per day. The mean number of steps per day was 9124. There were 1165 deaths over a mean 10.1 years of follow-up, including 406 CVD and 283 cancer deaths. The unadjusted incidence density for all-cause mortality was 76.7 per 1000 person-years (419 deaths) for the 655 individuals who took less than 4000 steps per day; 21.4 per 1000 person-years (488 deaths) for the 1727 individuals who took 4000 to 7999 steps per day; 6.9 per 1000 person-years (176 deaths) for the 1539 individuals who took 8000 to 11?999 steps per day; and 4.8 per 1000 person-years (82 deaths) for the 919 individuals who took at least 12?000 steps per day. Compared with taking 4000 steps per day, taking 8000 steps per day was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.44-0.55]), as was taking 12?000 steps per day (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.28-0.45]). Unadjusted incidence density for all-cause mortality by peak 30 cadence was 32.9 per 1000 person-years (406 deaths) for the 1080 individuals who took 18.5 to 56.0 steps per minute; 12.6 per 1000 person-years (207 deaths) for the 1153 individuals who took 56.1 to 69.2 steps per minute; 6.8 per 1000 person-years (124 deaths) for the 1074 individuals who took 69.3 to 82.8 steps per minute; and 5.3 per 1000 person-years (108 deaths) for the 1037 individuals who took 82.9 to 149.5 steps per minute. Greater step intensity was not significantly associated with lower mortality after adjustment for total steps per day (eg, highest vs lowest quartile of peak 30 cadence: HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.65-1.27]; P value for trend?=?.34). Conclusions and Relevance:Based on a representative sample of US adults, a greater number of daily steps was significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality. There was no significant association between step intensity and mortality after adjusting for total steps per day.

Project description:ImportanceCurrent public health guidelines for obesity prevention and control focus on promoting a normal body mass index (BMI), rarely addressing central obesity, which is reflected by high waist circumference (WC) and common in the general population. Studies of the association of normal-weight central obesity with long-term health outcomes are sparse.ObjectiveTo examine associations of normal-weight central obesity with all-cause and cause-specific mortality in postmenopausal women in the United States.Design, setting, and participantsA nationwide prospective cohort study of 156 624 postmenopausal women enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative at 40 clinical centers in the United States between 1993 and 1998. These women were observed through February 2017. Data analysis was performed from September 15, 2017, to March 13, 2019.ExposuresDifferent combinations of BMI (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; normal weight: BMI, 18.5-24.9; overweight: BMI, 25.0-29.9; and obesity: BMI, ≥30) and WC (normal: WC, ≤88 cm and high: WC, >88 cm).Main outcomes and measuresMortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer.ResultsOf the 156 624 women (mean [SD] age, 63.2 [7.2] years), during 2 811 187 person-years of follow-up, 43 838 deaths occurred, including 12 965 deaths from cardiovascular disease (29.6%) and 11 828 deaths from cancer (27.0%). Compared with women with normal weight and no central obesity and adjusted for demographic characteristics, socioeconomic status, lifestyle factors, and hormone use, the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality was 1.31 (95% CI, 1.20-1.42) among women with normal weight and central obesity, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94) among women with overweight and no central obesity, 1.16 (95% CI, 1.13-1.20) for women with overweight and central obesity, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89-0.94) for women with obesity and no central obesity, and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.27-1.34) for women with obesity and central obesity. Compared with normal weight without central obesity, normal-weight central obesity was associated with higher risk of cardiovascular disease mortality (hazard ratio, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.05-1.46) and cancer mortality (hazard ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01-1.43).Conclusions and relevanceNormal-weight central obesity in women was associated with excess risk of mortality, similar to that of women with BMI-defined obesity with central obesity. These findings underscore the need for future public health guidelines to include the prevention and control of central obesity, even in individuals with normal BMI.

Project description:ImportanceGuidelines recommend against routine breast and prostate cancer screenings in older adults with less than 10 years' life expectancy. One study using a claims-based prognostic index showed that receipt of cancer screening itself was associated with lower mortality, suggesting that the index may misclassify individuals when used to inform cancer screening, but this finding was attributed to residual confounding because the index did not account for functional status.ObjectiveTo examine whether cancer screening remains significantly associated with all-cause mortality in older adults after accounting for both comorbidities and functional status.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study included individuals older than 65 years who were eligible for breast or prostate cancer screening and who participated in the 2004 Health and Retirement Study. Data were linked to Medicare claims from 2001 to 2015. Data analysis was conducted from January to November 2020.Main outcomes and measuresA Cox model was used to estimate the association between all-cause mortality over 10 years and receipt of screening mammogram or prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test, adjusting for variables in a prognostic index that included age, sex, comorbidities, and functional status. Potential confounders (ie, education, income, marital status, geographic region, cognition, self-reported health, self-care, and self-perceived mortality risk) of the association between cancer screening and mortality were also tested.ResultsThe breast cancer screening cohort included 3257 women (mean [SD] age, 77.8 [7.5] years); the prostate cancer screening cohort included 2085 men (mean [SD] age, 76.1 [6.8] years). Receipt of screening mammogram was associated with lower hazard of all-cause mortality after accounting for all index variables (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.60-0.74). A weaker, but still statistically significant, association was found for screening PSA (aHR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.78-0.99). None of the potential confounders attenuated the association between screening and mortality except for cognition, which attenuated the aHR for mammogram from 0.67 (95% CI, 0.60-0.74) to 0.73 (95% CI, 0.64-0.82) and the aHR for PSA from 0.88 (95% CI, 0.78-0.99) to 0.92 (95% CI, 0.80-1.05), making PSA screening no longer statistically significant.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, cognition attenuated the observed association between cancer screening and mortality among older adults. These findings suggest that existing mortality prediction algorithms may be missing important variables that are associated with receipt of cancer screening and long-term mortality. Relying solely on algorithms to determine cancer screening may misclassify individuals as having limited life expectancy and stop screening prematurely. Screening decisions need to be individualized and not solely dependent on life expectancy prediction.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Multimorbidity and frailty are relevant conditions among older adult population. There is growing evidence about their association with poor health outcomes like disability, worst quality of life, and death. Nonetheless, the independent associations of both conditions have been studied, and few evidence exists about an interaction between them. Our aims were to assess the association of frailty and multimorbidity with the disability, quality of life and all-cause mortality as well as to analyze a potential interaction between these conditions. METHODS:Analytical samples included 1410 respondents for disability and quality of life, and 1792 for mortality. We performed a longitudinal analysis with older Mexican adults aged 50, using data collected from the WHO's Study on global AGEing and Adult Health Waves 1 and 2. Disability was measured using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), and quality of life using the WHOQOL (WHO Quality of Life) instrument. All-cause mortality was determined by reviewing death certificates. Associations of frailty and multimorbidity with disability, quality of life and mortality were estimated using linear regression and Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Multimorbidity assessed through three patterns (cardiopulmonary, vascular-metabolic, and mental-musculoskeletal) was associated with the three outcomes in this study. Cardiopulmonary and mental-musculoskeletal patterns increased the WHODAS mean score (??=?5.05; p <?0.01 and ??=?5.10; p <?0.01, respectively) and decreased WHOQOL score (??=?-?1.81; p <?0.01 and ??=?-?2.99; p <?0.01, respectively). Vascular-metabolic was associated with mortality (HR?=?1.47; p =?0.04), disability (??=?3.27; p <?0.01) and quality of life (??=?-?1.30; p =?0.02). Frailty was associated with mortality (pre-frail: HR?=?1.48; p?=?0.02 and frail: HR?=?1.68; p =?0.03), disability (pre-frail: ??=?5.02; p <?0.01; frail: ??=?13.29; p <?0.01) and quality of life (pre-frail: ??=?-?2.23; p <?0.01; frail: ??=?-?4.38; p <?0.01). Interaction terms of frailty and multimorbidity were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS:Multimorbidity and frailty are important predictors of poor health outcomes. These results highlight the importance of carrying out health promotion and prevention actions as well as specific interventions aimed at older adults who suffer from multimorbidity and frailty, in such a way that deleterious effects on health can be avoided.

Dataset Information

Association of Step Volume and Intensity With All-Cause Mortality in Older Women.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Conclusions and relevance

Publications

Association of Step Volume and Intensity With All-Cause Mortality in Older Women.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure