Associations of sitting accumulation patterns with cardio-metabolic risk biomarkers in Australian adults

Backgroun

Time spent in sedentary posture is associated with waist circumference and cardiovascular risk

Background The relationship between metabolic risk and time spent sitting, standing and stepping has not been well established. The present study aimed to determine associations of objectively measured time spent siting, standing and stepping, with coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. Methods A cross-sectional study of healthy non-smoking Glasgow postal workers, n=111 (55 office-workers, 5 women, and 56 walking/delivery-workers, 10 women), who wore activPAL physical activity monitors for seven days. Cardiovascular risks were assessed by metabolic syndrome categorisation and 10-y PROCAM risk. Results Mean(SD) age was 40(8) years, BMI 26.9(3.9)kg/m-2 and waist circumference 95.4(11.9)cm. Mean(SD) HDL-cholesterol 1.33(0.31), LDL-cholesterol 3.11(0.87), triglycerides 1.23(0.64)mmol/l and 10-y PROCAM risk 1.8(1.7)%. Participants spent mean(SD) 9.1(1.8)h/d sedentary, 7.6(1.2)h/d sleeping, 3.9(1.1)h/d standing and 3.3(0.9)h/d stepping, accumulating 14,708(4,984)steps/d in 61(25) sit-to-stand transitions per day. In univariate regressions - adjusting for age, sex, family history of CHD, shift worked, job type and socio-economic status - waist circumference (p=0.005), fasting triglycerides (p=0.002), HDL-cholesterol (p=0.001) and PROCAM-risk (p=0.047) were detrimentally associated with sedentary time. These associations remained significant after further adjustment for sleep, standing and stepping in stepwise regression models. However, after further adjustment for waist circumference, the associations were not significant. Compared to those without the metabolic syndrome, participants with the metabolic syndrome were significantly less active – fewer steps, shorter stepping duration and longer time sitting. Those with no metabolic syndrome features walked >15,000 steps/day, or spent >7h/day upright. Conclusion Longer time spent in sedentary posture is significantly associated with higher CHD risk and larger waist circumference

A randomised feasibility study to investigate the impact of education and the addition of prompts on the sedentary behaviour of office workers

Abstract Background Office workers have been identified as being at risk of accumulating high amounts of sedentary time in prolonged events during work hours, which has been associated with increased risk of a number of long-term health conditions. There is some evidence that providing advice to stand at regular intervals during the working day, and using computer-based prompts, can reduce sedentary behaviour in office workers. However, evidence of effectiveness, feasibility and acceptability for these types of intervention is currently limited. Methods A 2-arm, parallel group, cluster-randomised feasibility trial to assess the acceptability of prompts to break up sedentary behaviour was conducted with office workers in a commercial bank (n = 21). Participants were assigned to an education only group (EG) or prompt and education group (PG). Both groups received education on reducing and breaking up sitting at work, and the PG also received hourly prompts, delivered by Microsoft Outlook over 10 weeks, reminding them to stand. Objective measurements of sedentary behaviour were made using activPAL monitors worn at three time points: baseline, in the last 2 weeks of the intervention period and 12 weeks after the intervention. Focus groups were conducted to explore the acceptability of the intervention and the motivations and barriers to changing sedentary behaviour. Results Randomly generated, customised prompts, delivered by Microsoft Outlook, with messages about breaking up sitting, proved to be a feasible and acceptable way of delivering prompts to office workers. Participants in both groups reduced their sitting, but changes were not maintained at follow-up. The education session seemed to increase outcome expectations of the benefits of changing sedentary behaviour and promote self-regulation of behaviour in some participants. However, low self-efficacy and a desire to conform to cultural norms were barriers to changing behaviour. Conclusions Prompts delivered by Microsoft Outlook were a feasible, low-cost way of prompting office workers to break up their sedentary behaviour, although further research is needed to determine whether this has an additional impact on sedentary behaviour, to education alone. The role of cultural norms, and promoting self-efficacy, should be considered in the design of future interventions. Trial registration This study was registered retrospectively as a clinical trial on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID no. NCT02609282 ) on 23 March 2015

Application of the Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ) to office based workers

Background The workplace is a setting where sedentary behaviour is highly prevalent. Accurately measuring physical activity and sedentary behaviour is crucial to assess the impact of behavioural change interventions. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability and criterion validity of the Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ) and compare with data collected by accelerometers. Methods A test-retest study was undertaken on 99 participants using the OSPAQ. Data were then compared to accelerometer records of 41 participants. Reliability was assessed by paired t-test and intra-class correlations (ICC) via a two-way mixed model based on absolute agreement. Difference and agreement were measured by comparison of mean self-reported data with accelerometer data using the Pearson’s correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots. Results The ICCs for minutes spent sitting (0.66), standing (0.83) and walking (0.77) showed moderate to strong test-retest reliability. No significant differences were found between the repeated measurements taken seven days apart. Correlations with the accelerometer readings were moderate. The Bland-Altman plots showed moderate agreement for standing time and walking time but systematic variation for sedentary time. Conclusion The OSPAQ appears to have acceptable reliability and validity measurement properties for application in the office workplace setting

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

Applying Benford’s law to detect accounting data manipulation in the banking industry

We utilise Benford’s Law to test if balance sheet and income statement data broadly used to assess bank soundness were manipulated prior to and also during the global financial crisis. We find that all banks resort to loan loss provisions to manipulate earnings and income upwards. Distressed institutions that have stronger incentives to conceal their financial difficulties resort additionally to manipulating loan loss allowances and non-performing loans downwards. Moreover, manipulation is magnified during the crisis and expands to encompass regulatory capital

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 literature review of determinants of sedentary behaviour in older adults:a DEDIPAC study

BACKGROUND: Older adults are the most sedentary segment of society and high sedentary time is associated with poor health and wellbeing outcomes in this population. Identifying determinants of sedentary behaviour is a necessary step to develop interventions to reduce sedentary time. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify factors associated with sedentary behaviour in older adults. Pubmed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched for articles published between 2000 and May 2014. The search strategy was based on four key elements: (a) sedentary behaviour and its synonyms; (b) determinants and its synonyms (e.g. correlates, factors); (c) types of sedentary behaviour (e.g. TV viewing, sitting, gaming) and (d) types of determinants (e.g. environmental, behavioural). Articles were included in the review if specific information about sedentary behaviour in older adults was reported. Studies on samples identified by disease were excluded. Study quality was rated by means of QUALSYST. The full review protocol is available from PROSPERO (PROSPERO 2014: CRD42014009823). The analysis was guided by the socio-ecological model framework. RESULTS: Twenty-two original studies were identified out of 4472 returned by the systematic search. These included 19 cross-sectional, 2 longitudinal and 1 qualitative studies, all published after 2011. Half of the studies were European. The study quality was generally high with a median of 82 % (IQR 69-96 %) using Qualsyst tool. Personal factors were the most frequently investigated with consistent positive association for age, negative for retirement, obesity and health status. Only four studies considered environmental determinants suggesting possible association with mode of transport, type of housing, cultural opportunities and neighbourhood safety and availability of places to rest. Only two studies investigated mediating factors. Very limited information was available on contexts and sub-domains of sedentary behaviours. CONCLUSION: Few studies have investigated determinants of sedentary behaviour in older adults and these have to date mostly focussed on personal factors, and qualitative studies were mostly lacking. More longitudinal studies are needed as well as inclusion of a broader range of personal and contextual potential determinants towards a systems-based approach, and future studies should be more informed by qualitative work

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

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 &gt; 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