Reliability and validity of three questionnaires measuring context-specific sedentary behaviour and associated correlates in adolescents, adults and older adults

BACKGROUND: Reliable and valid measures of total sedentary time, context-specific sedentary behaviour (SB) and its potential correlates are useful for the development of future interventions. The purpose was to examine test-retest reliability and criterion validity of three newly developed questionnaires on total sedentary time, context-specific SB and its potential correlates in adolescents, adults and older adults. METHODS: Reliability and validity was tested in six different samples of Flemish (Belgium) residents. For the reliability study, 20 adolescents, 22 adults and 20 older adults filled out the age-specific SB questionnaire twice. Test-retest reliability was analysed using Kappa coefficients, Intraclass Correlation Coefficients and/or percentage agreement, separately for the three age groups. For the validity study, data were retrieved from 62 adolescents, 33 adults and 33 older adults, with activPAL as criterion measure. Spearman correlations and Bland-Altman plots (or non-parametric approach) were used to analyse criterion validity, separately for the three age groups and for weekday, weekend day and average day. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability for self-reported total sedentary time indicated following values: ICC = 0.37-0.67 in adolescents; ICC = 0.73-0.77 in adults; ICC = 0.68-0.80 in older adults. Item-specific reliability results (e.g. context-specific SB and its potential correlates) showed good-to-excellent reliability in 67.94%, 68.90% and 66.38% of the items in adolescents, adults and older adults respectively. All items belonging to sedentary-related equipment and simultaneous SB showed good reliability. The sections of the questionnaire with lowest reliability were: context-specific SB (adolescents), potential correlates of computer use (adults) and potential correlates of motorized transport (older adults). Spearman correlations between self-reported total sedentary time and the activPAL were different for each age group: rho = 0.02-0.42 (adolescents), rho = 0.06-0.52 (adults), rho = 0.38-0.50 (older adults). Participants over-reported total sedentary time (except for weekend day in older adults) compared to the activPAL, for weekday, weekend day and average day respectively by +57.05%, +46.29%, +53.34% in adolescents; +40.40%, +19.15%, +32.89% in adults; +10.10%, -6.24%, +4.11% in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: The questionnaires showed acceptable test-retest reliability and criterion validity. However, over-reporting of total SB was noticeable in adolescents and adults. Nevertheless, these questionnaires will be useful in getting context-specific information on SB

Positive and negative well-being and objectively measured sedentary behaviour in older adults: evidence from three cohorts

Background: Sedentary behaviour is related to poorer health independently of time spent in moderate to vigorous physical activity. The aim of this study was to investigate whether wellbeing or symptoms of anxiety or depression predict sedentary behaviour in older adults. Method: Participants were drawn from the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936 (LBC1936) (n = 271), and the West of Scotland Twenty-07 1950s (n = 309) and 1930s (n = 118) cohorts. Sedentary outcomes, sedentary time, and number of sit-to-stand transitions, were measured with a three-dimensional accelerometer (activPAL activity monitor) worn for 7 days. In the Twenty-07 cohorts, symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed in 2008 and sedentary outcomes were assessed ~ 8 years later in 2015 and 2016. In the LBC1936 cohort, wellbeing and symptoms of anxiety and depression were assessed concurrently with sedentary behaviour in 2015 and 2016. We tested for an association between wellbeing, anxiety or depression and the sedentary outcomes using multivariate regression analysis. Results: We observed no association between wellbeing or symptoms of anxiety and the sedentary outcomes. Symptoms of depression were positively associated with sedentary time in the LBC1936 and Twenty-07 1950s cohort, and negatively associated with number of sit-to-stand transitions in the LBC1936. Meta-analytic estimates of the association between depressive symptoms and sedentary time or number of sit-to-stand transitions, adjusted for age, sex, BMI, long-standing illness, and education, were β = 0.11 (95% CI = 0.03, 0.18) and β = − 0.11 (95% CI = − 0.19, −0.03) respectively. Conclusion: Our findings indicate that depressive symptoms are positively associated with sedentary behavior. Future studies should investigate the causal direction of this association

Systematic comparative validation of self-report measures of sedentary time against an objective measure of postural sitting (activPAL)

Background: Sedentary behaviour is a public health concern that requires surveillance and epidemiological research. For such large scale studies, self-report tools are a pragmatic measurement solution. A large number of self-report tools are currently in use, but few have been validated against an objective measure of sedentary time and there is no comparative information between tools to guide choice or to enable comparison between studies. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic comparison, generalisable to all tools, of the validity of self-report measures of sedentary time against a gold standard sedentary time objective monitor. Methods: Cross sectional data from three cohorts (N = 700) were used in this validation study. Eighteen self-report measures of sedentary time, based on the TAxonomy of Self-report SB Tools (TASST) framework, were compared against an objective measure of postural sitting (activPAL) to provide information, generalizable to all existing tools, on agreement and precision using Bland-Altman statistics, on criterion validity using Pearson correlation, and on data loss. Results: All self-report measures showed poor accuracy compared with the objective measure of sedentary time, with very wide limits of agreement and poor precision (random error > 2.5 h). Most tools under-reported total sedentary time and demonstrated low correlations with objective data. The type of assessment used by the tool, whether direct, proxy, or a composite measure, influenced the measurement characteristics. Proxy measures (TV time) and single item direct measures using a visual analogue scale to assess the proportion of the day spent sitting, showed the best combination of precision and data loss. The recall period (e.g. previous week) had little influence on measurement characteristics. Conclusion: Self-report measures of sedentary time result in large bias, poor precision and low correlation with an objective measure of sedentary time. Choice of tool depends on the research context, design and question. Choice can be guided by this systematic comparative validation and, in the case of population surveillance, it recommends to use a visual analog scale and a 7 day recall period. Comparison between studies and improving population estimates of average sedentary time, is possible with the comparative correction factors provided

The Feasibility of performing resistance exercise with acutely ill hospitalized older adults

BACKGROUND: For older adults, hospitalization frequently results in deterioration of mobility and function. Nevertheless, there are little data about how older adults exercise in the hospital and definitive studies are not yet available to determine what type of physical activity will prevent hospital related decline. Strengthening exercise may prevent deconditioning and Pilates exercise, which focuses on proper body mechanics and posture, may promote safety. METHODS: A hospital-based resistance exercise program, which incorporates principles of resistance training and Pilates exercise, was developed and administered to intervention subjects to determine whether acutely-ill older patients can perform resistance exercise while in the hospital. Exercises were designed to be reproducible and easily performed in bed. The primary outcome measures were adherence and participation. RESULTS: Thirty-nine ill patients, recently admitted to an acute care hospital, who were over age 70 [mean age of 82.0 (SD= 7.3)] and ambulatory prior to admission, were randomized to the resistance exercise group (19) or passive range of motion (ROM) group (20). For the resistance exercise group, participation was 71% (p = 0.004) and adherence was 63% (p = 0.020). Participation and adherence for ROM exercises was 96% and 95%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Using a standardized and simple exercise regimen, selected, ill, older adults in the hospital are able to comply with resistance exercise. Further studies are needed to determine if resistance exercise can prevent or treat hospital-related deterioration in mobility and function

Validity and reliability of subjective methods to assess sedentary behaviour in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Subjective measures of sedentary behaviour (SB) (i.e. questionnaires and diaries/logs) are widely implemented, and can be useful for capturing type and context of SBs. However, little is known about comparative validity and reliability. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to: 1) identify subjective methods to assess overall, domain- and behaviour-specific SB, and 2) examine the validity and reliability of these methods. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE and SPORTDiscus were searched up to March 2020. Inclusion criteria were: 1) assessment of SB, 2) evaluation of subjective measurement tools, 3) being performed in healthy adults, 4) manuscript written in English, and 5) paper was peer-reviewed. Data of validity and/or reliability measurements was extracted from included studies and a meta-analysis using random effects was performed to assess the pooled correlation coefficients of the validity. RESULTS: The systematic search resulted in 2423 hits. After excluding duplicates and screening on title and abstract, 82 studies were included with 75 self-reported measurement tools. There was wide variability in the measurement properties and quality of the studies. The criterion validity varied between poor-to-excellent (correlation coefficient [R] range - 0.01- 0.90) with logs/diaries (R = 0.63 [95%CI 0.48-0.78]) showing higher criterion validity compared to questionnaires (R = 0.35 [95%CI 0.32-0.39]). Furthermore, correlation coefficients of single- and multiple-item questionnaires were comparable (1-item R = 0.34; 2-to-9-items R = 0.35; ≥10-items R = 0.37). The reliability of SB measures was moderate-to-good, with the quality of these studies being mostly fair-to-good. CONCLUSION: Logs and diaries are recommended to validly and reliably assess self-reported SB. However, due to time and resources constraints, 1-item questionnaires may be preferred to subjectively assess SB in large-scale observations when showing similar validity and reliability compared to longer questionnaires. REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018105994

Interpretable machine learning models for classifying low back pain status using functional physiological variables.

PURPOSE:To evaluate the predictive performance of statistical models which distinguishes different low back pain (LBP) sub-types and healthy controls, using as input predictors the time-varying signals of electromyographic and kinematic variables, collected during low-load lifting. METHODS:Motion capture with electromyography (EMG) assessment was performed on 49 participants [healthy control (con) = 16, remission LBP (rmLBP) = 16, current LBP (LBP) = 17], whilst performing a low-load lifting task, to extract a total of 40 predictors (kinematic and electromyographic variables). Three statistical models were developed using functional data boosting (FDboost), for binary classification of LBP statuses (model 1: con vs. LBP; model 2: con vs. rmLBP; model 3: rmLBP vs. LBP). After removing collinear predictors (i.e. a correlation of > 0.7 with other predictors) and inclusion of the covariate sex, 31 predictors were included for fitting model 1, 31 predictors for model 2, and 32 predictors for model 3. RESULTS:Seven EMG predictors were selected in model 1 (area under the receiver operator curve [AUC] of 90.4%), nine predictors in model 2 (AUC of 91.2%), and seven predictors in model 3 (AUC of 96.7%). The most influential predictor was the biceps femoris muscle (peak [Formula: see text]  = 0.047) in model 1, the deltoid muscle (peak [Formula: see text] =  0.052) in model 2, and the iliocostalis muscle (peak [Formula: see text] =  0.16) in model 3. CONCLUSION:The ability to transform time-varying physiological differences into clinical differences could be used in future prospective prognostic research to identify the dominant movement impairments that drive the increased risk. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material

Stand Out in Class: restructuring theclassroom environment to reducesedentary behaviour in 9–10-year-olds—study protocol for a pilot clusterrandomised controlled trial

Background: Sedentary behaviour (sitting) is a highly prevalent negative health behaviour, with individuals of allages exposed to environments that promote prolonged sitting. Excessive sedentary behaviour adversely affects health inchildren and adults. As sedentary behaviour tracks from childhood into adulthood, the reduction of sedentary time inyoung people is key for the prevention of chronic diseases that result from excessive sitting in later life. The sedentaryschool classroom represents an ideal setting for environmentalchange, through the provision of sit-stand desks. Whilstthe use of sit-stand desks in classrooms demonstrates positiveeffects in some key outcomes, evidence is currently limitedby small samples and/or short intervention durations, withfewstudiesadoptingrandomisedcontrolledtrial(RCT)designs. This paper describes the protocol of a pilot cluster RCT of a sit-stand desk interventioninprimaryschoolclassrooms.Methods/Design:A two-arm pilot cluster RCT will be conducted in eight primary schools (four intervention, four control)with at least 120 year 5 children (aged 9–10 years). Sit-stand desks will replace six standard desks in the interventionclassrooms. Teachers will be encouraged to ensure all pupils are exposed to the sit-stand desks for at least 1 h/dayon average using a rotation system. Schools assigned to the control arm will continue with their usual practice, noenvironmental changes will be made to their classrooms. Measurements will be taken at baseline, beforerandomisation, and at the end of the schools’academic year. In this study, the primary outcomes of interest will beschool and participant recruitment and attrition, acceptability of the intervention, and acceptability and complianceto the proposed outcome measures (including activPAL-measured school-time and school-day sitting, accelerometer-measured physical activity, adiposity, blood pressure, cognitive function, academic progress, engagement, andbehaviour) for inclusion in a definitive trial. A full process evaluation and an exploratory economic evaluation willalso be conducted to further inform a definitive tria

Rationale and study design for a randomised controlled trial to reduce sedentary time in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: project stand (Sedentary Time ANd diabetes)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The rising prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is a major public health problem. There is an urgent need for effective lifestyle interventions to prevent the development of T2DM. Sedentary behaviour (sitting time) has recently been identified as a risk factor for diabetes, often independent of the time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Project STAND (<it>Sedentary Time ANd Diabetes</it>) is a study which aims to reduce sedentary behaviour in younger adults at high risk of T2DM.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A reduction in sedentary time is targeted using theory driven group structured education. The STAND programme is subject to piloting and process evaluation in line with the MRC framework for complex interventions. Participants are encouraged to self-monitor and self-regulate their behaviour. The intervention is being assessed in a randomised controlled trial with 12 month follow up. Inclusion criteria are a) aged 18-40 years with a BMI in the obese range; b) 18-40 years with a BMI in the overweight range plus an additional risk factor for T2DM. Participants are randomised to the intervention (n = 89) or control (n = 89) arm. The primary outcome is a reduction in sedentary behaviour at 12 months as measured by an accelerometer (count < 100/min). Secondary outcomes include physical activity, sitting/lying time using the ActivPAL posture monitor, fasting and 2 h oral glucose tolerance test, lipids, inflammatory biomarkers, body weight, waist circumference, blood pressure, illness perceptions, and efficacy beliefs for behaviour change.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This is the first UK trial to address sedentary behaviour change in a population of younger adults at risk of T2DM. The results will provide a platform for the development of a range of future multidisciplinary interventions in this rapidly expanding high-risk population.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current controlled trials <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN08434554">ISRCTN08434554</a>, MRC project 91409.</p

A three arm cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SMART work & life intervention for reducing daily sitting time in office workers : study protocol

Background:Office-based workers typically spend 70-85% of working hours, and a large proportion of leisure time, sitting. High levels of sitting have been linked to poor health. There is a need for fully powered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with long-term follow-up to test the effectiveness of interventions to reduce sitting. This paper describes the methodology of a three-arm cluster RCT designed to determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SMART Work &amp; Life intervention, delivered with and without a height-adjustable desk, for reducing daily sitting. Methods/Design:A three-arm cluster RCT of 33 clusters (660 council workers) will be conducted in three areas in England (Leicester; Manchester; Liverpool). Office groups (clusters) will be randomised to the SMART Work &amp; Life intervention delivered with (group 1) or without (group 2) a height-adjustable desk or a control group (group 3). SMART Work &amp; Life includes organisational (e.g., management buy-in, provision/support for standing meetings), environmental (e.g., relocating waste bins, printers), and group/individual (education, action planning, goal setting, addressing barriers, coaching, self-monitoring, social support) level behaviour change strategies, with strategies driven by workplace champions. Baseline, 3, 12 and 24 month measures will be taken. Objectively measured daily sitting time (activPAL3). objectively measured sitting, standing, stepping, prolonged sitting and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity time and number of steps at work and daily; objectively measured sleep (wrist accelerometry). Adiposity, blood pressure, fasting glucose, glycated haemoglobin, cholesterol (total, HDL, LDL) and triglycerides will be assessed from capillary blood samples. Questionnaires will examine dietary intake, fatigue, musculoskeletal issues, job performance and satisfaction, work engagement, occupational and general fatigue, stress, presenteeism, anxiety and depression and sickness absence (organisational records). Quality of life and resources used (e.g. GP visits, outpatient attendances) will also be assessed. We will conduct a full process evaluation and cost-effectiveness analysis. Discussion:The results of this RCT will 1) help to understand how effective an important simple, yet relatively expensive environmental change is for reducing sitting, 2) provide evidence on changing behaviour across all waking hours, and 3) provide evidence for policy guidelines around population and workplace health and well-being. Trial registration: ISRCTN11618007 . Registered on 21 January 2018