Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Murtagh EM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7389819 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundStroke survivors are often physically inactive as well as sedentary,and may sit for long periods of time each day. This increases cardiometabolic risk and has impacts on physical and other functions. Interventions to reduce or interrupt periods of sedentary time, as well as to increase physical activity after stroke, could reduce the risk of secondary cardiovascular events and mortality during life after stroke.ObjectivesTo determine whether interventions designed to reduce sedentary behaviour after stroke, or interventions with the potential to do so, can reduce the risk of death or secondary vascular events, modify cardiovascular risk, and reduce sedentary behaviour.Search methodsIn December 2019, we searched the Cochrane Stroke Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and PEDro. We also searched registers of ongoing trials, screened reference lists, and contacted experts in the field.Selection criteriaRandomised trials comparing interventions to reduce sedentary time with usual care, no intervention, or waiting-list control, attention control, sham intervention or adjunct intervention. We also included interventions intended to fragment or interrupt periods of sedentary behaviour.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected studies and performed 'Risk of bias' assessments. We analyzed data using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the certainty of the evidence with the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included 10 studies with 753 people with stroke. Five studies used physical activity interventions, four studies used a multicomponent lifestyle intervention, and one study used an intervention to reduce and interrupt sedentary behaviour. In all studies, the risk of bias was high or unclear in two or more domains. Nine studies had high risk of bias in at least one domain. The interventions did not increase or reduce deaths (risk difference (RD) 0.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.02 to 0.03; 10 studies, 753 participants; low-certainty evidence), the incidence of recurrent cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.01; 10 studies, 753 participants; low-certainty evidence), the incidence of falls (and injuries) (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.02; 10 studies, 753 participants; low-certainty evidence), or incidence of other adverse events (moderate-certainty evidence). Interventions did not increase or reduce the amount of sedentary behaviour time (mean difference (MD) +0.13 hours/day, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.68; 7 studies, 300 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There were too few data to examine effects on patterns of sedentary behaviour. The effect of interventions on cardiometabolic risk factors allowed very limited meta-analysis.Authors' conclusionsSedentary behaviour research in stroke seems important, yet the evidence is currently incomplete, and we found no evidence for beneficial effects. Current World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines recommend reducing the amount of sedentary time in people with disabilities, in general. The evidence is currently not strong enough to guide practice on how best to reduce sedentariness specifically in people with stroke. More high-quality randomised trials are needed, particularly involving participants with mobility limitations. Trials should include longer-term interventions specifically targeted at reducing time spent sedentary, risk factor outcomes, objective measures of sedentary behaviour (and physical activity), and long-term follow-up.
| S-EPMC8238669 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSedentary behaviour is any waking behaviour characterised by an energy expenditure of ≤1.5 metabolic equivalent of task while in a sitting or reclining posture. Prolonged bouts of sedentary behaviour have been associated with negative health outcomes in all age groups. We examined qualitative research investigating perceptions and experiences of sedentary behaviour and of participation in non-workplace interventions designed to reduce sedentary behaviour in adult populations.MethodA systematic search of seven databases (MEDLINE, AMED, Cochrane, PsychINFO, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and Web of Science) was conducted in September 2017. Studies were assessed for methodological quality and a thematic synthesis was conducted. Prospero database ID: CRD42017083436.ResultsThirty individual studies capturing the experiences of 918 individuals were included. Eleven studies examined experiences and/or perceptions of sedentary behaviour in older adults (typically ≥60 years); ten studies focused on sedentary behaviour in people experiencing a clinical condition, four explored influences on sedentary behaviour in adults living in socio-economically disadvantaged communities, two examined university students' experiences of sedentary behaviour, two on those of working-age adults, and one focused on cultural influences on sedentary behaviour. Three analytical themes were identified: 1) the impact of different life stages on sedentary behaviour 2) lifestyle factors influencing sedentary behaviour and 3) barriers and facilitators to changing sedentary behaviour.ConclusionsSedentary behaviour is multifaceted and influenced by a complex interaction between individual, environmental and socio-cultural factors. Micro and macro pressures are experienced at different life stages and in the context of illness; these shape individuals' beliefs and behaviour related to sedentariness. Knowledge of sedentary behaviour and the associated health consequences appears limited in adult populations, therefore there is a need for provision of accessible information about ways in which sedentary behaviour reduction can be integrated in people's daily lives. Interventions targeting a reduction in sedentary behaviour need to consider the multiple influences on sedentariness when designing and implementing interventions.
| S-EPMC6692932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background We examined associations of objectively measured physical activity ( PA ) and sedentary time with cardiovascular disease biomarkers at age 60 to 64 years. This included investigation of sex differences and the extent to which associations may be mediated by adiposity. Methods and Results Participants were 795 men and 827 women aged 60 to 64 years from the Medical Research Council National Survey of Health and Development. Combined heart rate and movement sensors worn for 5 consecutive days were used to derive overall PA energy expenditure, kJ /kg per day) and time spent sedentary (<1.5 metabolic equivalent of tasks), in light PA (1.5-3 metabolic equivalent of tasks) and moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA (>3 metabolic equivalent of tasks). Linear regression models were used to relate each PA parameter to inflammatory (C-reactive protein, interleukin-6), endothelial (tissue-plasminogen activator, E-selectin) and adipokine (leptin, adiponectin) markers extracted from fasting blood samples. Greater time in light PA and moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA and less sedentary time were associated with more favorable biomarker levels. For C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and leptin, these differences were greater among women than men. For example, % differences (95% confidence intervals) in leptin for men and women per SD increases in sedentary time: 7.9 (2.7, 13.0) and 20.6 (15.3, 25.8); light intensity PA : -3.8 (-8.9, 12.7) and -17.7 (-23.1, -12.4), moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA : -12.9 (-17.9, -8.0) and -18.3 (-23.4, -13.1). Fat mass mediated a greater proportion of these associations in women than men. Conclusions Greater light PA and moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA and less sedentary time in early old age were associated with more favorable cardiovascular biomarker profiles. Fat mass partially mediated these associations but more strongly in women than men, which explained sex differences.
| S-EPMC6201385 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability of mobile health (mHealth) technology (including wearable activity monitors and smartphone applications) for promoting physical activity (PA) and reducing sedentary behaviour (SB) in workplace settings.MethodsSystematic searches were conducted in seven electronic databases (MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and the Cochrane library). Studies were included if mHealth was a major intervention component, PA/SB was a primary outcome, and participants were recruited and/or the intervention was delivered in the workplace. Study quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project (EPHPP) tool. Interventions were coded for behaviour change techniques (BCTs) using the Coventry, Aberdeen and London - Refined (CALO-RE) taxonomy.ResultsTwenty-five experimental and quasi-experimental studies were included. Studies were highly heterogeneous and only one was rated as 'strong' methodological quality. Common BCTs included self-monitoring, feedback, goal-setting and social comparison. A total of 14/25 (56%) studies reported a significant increase in PA, and 4/10 (40%) reported a significant reduction in sedentary time; 11/16 (69%) studies reported a significant impact on secondary outcomes including reductions in weight, systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol. While overall acceptability was high, a large decline in technology use and engagement was observed over time.ConclusionsWhile methodological quality was generally weak, there is reasonable evidence for mHealth in a workplace context as a feasible, acceptable and effective tool to promote PA. The impact in the longer term and on SB is less clear. Higher quality, mixed methods studies are needed to explore the reasons for decline in engagement with time and the longer-term potential of mHealth in workplace interventions.Protocol registration: The review protocol was registered with PROSPERO: CRD42017058856.
| S-EPMC6437332 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Older adults are the most sedentary age group, with sedentary behaviour having negative health-related consequences. There is currently limited understanding of how older adults view sedentary behaviour. This study investigated older adults' understanding of the concept of sedentary behaviour. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 22 community-dwelling older adults in urban North-West England, selected to be diverse in socio-economic background and activity levels. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. An inductive thematic analysis was conducted. Participants often construed sedentary behaviour as synonymous with a lack of physical activity, and many perceived reducing sedentary behaviour and increasing moderate-to-vigorous physical activity to be the same thing. Participants perceived the term 'sedentary' to have negative connotations and were often judgemental of people who engaged in high levels of sedentary behaviour. Most participants considered reducing sedentary behaviour to be of value, though more active individuals were unconvinced that reducing sedentary behaviour has value beyond the benefits of being physically active. Interventions may wish to provide education to address the misconception that increasing moderate-to-vigorous physical activity is necessary in order to reduce sedentary behaviour. Educating older adults on the independent health consequences of sedentary behaviour may also prove beneficial.
| S-EPMC8438784 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The objective of this study was to systematically review the literature and compare the effectiveness of controlled interventions with a focus on physical activity (PA) and/or sedentary behaviours (SBs) for reducing sedentary time in adults. Six electronic databases were searched to identify all studies that examined the effects of interventions that targeted PA and/or SBs and that reported on changes in SBs (sedentary, sitting or television time). A qualitative synthesis was performed for all studies, and meta-analyses conducted among studies with mean differences (min/d) of sedentary time.ProsperoCRD42014006535. Sixty-five controlled studies met inclusion criteria; 33 were used in the meta-analyses. Interventions with a focus on PA or that included a PA and SB component produced less consistent findings and generally resulted in modest reductions in sedentary time (PA: standardized mean differences [SMD] = -0.22 [95% confidence interval {CI}: -0.35, -0.10], PA+SB: SMD= -0.37 [95% CI: -0.69, -0.05]). Moderate quality evidence from the randomized controlled trial meta-analysis coupled with the qualitative synthesis provides consistent evidence that large and clinically meaningful reductions in sedentary time can be expected from interventions with a focus on reducing SBs (SMD= -1.28 [95% CI: -1.68, -0.87] ). There is evidence to support the need for interventions to include a component focused on reducing SBs in order to generate clinically meaningful reductions in sedentary time.
| S-EPMC4233995 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sedentary behaviour tracks from early to middle childhood, suggesting the need to intervene early. The aim of this systematic review was to identify determinants of change in accelerometer-assessed sedentary behaviour in young children, with a view to informing interventions. Ten electronic databases were searched. Longitudinal and intervention studies were included if they (a) targeted sedentary behaviour in young children (less than of equal to 6 years), (b) assessed change in accelerometer-assessed sedentary behaviour, and (c) reported on at least one determinant of change in sedentary behaviour. Intervention components were coded according to clusters of behaviour change technique (BCT) (ie, grouping similar BCTs components). Data synthesis was guided by the socioecological model. Sixteen studies (four longitudinal; 12 intervention) met the inclusion criteria. Two (out of five identified determinants) were associated with an increase in sedentary behaviour in longitudinal studies: the after childcare/school period and transition from childcare to school. Three (out of 21 identified determinants) were associated with a decrease in sedentary behaviour in intervention studies: "goals and planning" (ie, "behavioural contract"), "repetition and substitution" (ie, "graded tasks"), and "reward and treat" (ie, "incentives"). The environmental and interpersonal determinants identified in this review may help to inform behavioural strategies, timing, and settings for future interventions.
| S-EPMC6772060 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSedentary behaviour (SB) research has grown exponentially but efficacy for interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour is often contaminated by interventions primarily or co-targeting other behaviours and outcomes. The primary aim of this research therefore, was to systematically review the efficacy of interventions specifically targeting sedentary behaviour reduction, as a sole primary outcome, from randomised control trials in healthy ambulatory adults. This research also sought to identify the successful interventions characteristics, behaviour change techniques (BCT's) and underlying theories, and their relation to intervention effectiveness.MethodsWe followed PRISMA reporting guidelines for this systematic review. Six electronic databases were searched and a grey literature review conducted. Only randomised or cluster randomised controlled trials, from 2000 to 2020, in adult populations with a sole primary outcome of change in sedentary behaviour were included. Data codebooks were developed, data were extracted, and a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis was conducted using mixed methods random effects models.ResultsOf 5589 studies identified, 7 studies met the inclusion criteria. Six studies reported activPAL3 measures of mean daily sitting time, and four reported mean daily standing time, stepping time and number of sedentary breaks. Pooled analysis of weighted mean differences revealed a reduction in mean daily sitting time of -32.4mins CI (-50.3, -14.4), an increase in mean daily standing time of 31.75mins CI (13.7, 49.8), and mean daily stepping time of 9.5mins CI (2.8, 16.3), and an increase in rate of sedentary breaks per day of 3.6 (CI 1.6, 5.6). BCTs used exclusively in two of the three most effective interventions are 'feedback on behaviour' and 'goal setting behaviour' whilst all three most effective interventions included 'instruction on how to perform the behaviour' and 'adding objects to the environment', BCTs which were also used in less effective interventions.ConclusionsAlthough limited by small sample sizes and short follow up periods, this review suggests that interventions specifically designed to change sedentary behaviour, reduce overall daily sitting time by half an hour, with an equivalent increase in standing time, in the short to medium term. Effective characteristics and behaviour change strategies are identified for future development of high quality interventions targeting change in sedentary behaviour.Prospero registrationPROSPERO 2020 CRD42020172457 Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172457.
| S-EPMC8423252 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Qualitative studies identified barriers and facilitators associated with work-related sedentary behaviour. The objective of this study was to determine common perceived barriers and facilitators among office workers, assess subgroup differences, and describe sedentary behaviour. From two Swedish companies, 547 office workers (41 years (IQR = 35–48), 65% women, 66% highly educated) completed questionnaires on perceived barriers and facilitators, for which subgroup differences in age, gender, education, and workplace sedentary behaviour were assessed. Sedentary behaviour was measured using inclinometers (n = 311). The most frequently reported barrier was sitting is a habit (67%), which was reported more among women than men (Χ² = 5.14, p = 0.03) and more among highly sedentary office workers (Χ² = 9.26, p < 0.01). The two other most reported barriers were that standing is uncomfortable (29%) and standing is tiring (24%). Facilitators with the most support were the introduction of either standing- or walking-meetings (respectively 33% and 29%) and more possibilities or reminders for breaks (31%). The proportion spent sedentary was 64% at the workplace, 61% on working days, and 57% on non-working days. This study provides a detailed understanding of office workers’ ideas about sitting and means to reduce sitting. We advise to include the supported facilitators and individualized support in interventions to work towards more effective strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour.
| S-EPMC5923834 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6483121 | biostudies-literature