Physical activity guidelines and cardiovascular risk in children: a cross-sectional analysis to determine whether 60 minutes is enough

Background Physical activity reduces cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends children engage in 60 min daily moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). The effect of compliance with this recommendation on childhood cardiovascular risk has not been empirically tested. To evaluate whether achieving recommendations results in reduced composite-cardiovascular risk score (CCVR) in children, and to examine if vigorous PA (VPA) has independent risk-reduction effects. Methods PA was measured using accelerometry in 182 children (9–11 years). Subjects were grouped according to achievement of 60 min daily MVPA (active) or not (inactive). CCVR was calculated (sum of z-scores: DXA body fat %, blood pressure, VO2peak, flow mediated dilation, left ventricular diastolic function; CVR score ≥1SD indicated ‘higher risk’). The cohort was further split into quintiles for VPA and odds ratios (OR) calculated for each quintile. Results Active children (92 (53 boys)) undertook more MVPA (38 ± 11 min, P  0.05). CCVR in the lowest VPA quintile was significantly greater than the highest quintile (3.9 ± 0.6, P < 0.05), and the OR was 4.7 times higher. Conclusion Achievement of current guidelines has positive effects on body composition and cardiorespiratory fitness, but not CCVR. Vigorous physical activity appears to have beneficial effects on CVD risk, independent of moderate PA, implying a more prescriptive approach may be needed for future VPA guidelines

The relationships between golf and health:A scoping review

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationships between golf and health. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: Published and unpublished reports of any age or language, identified by searching electronic databases, platforms, reference lists, websites and from consulting experts. REVIEW METHODS: A 3-step search strategy identified relevant published primary and secondary studies as well as grey literature. Identified studies were screened for final inclusion. Data were extracted using a standardised tool, to form (1) a descriptive analysis and (2) a thematic summary. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 4944 records were identified with an initial search. 301 studies met criteria for the scoping review. Golf can provide moderate intensity physical activity and is associated with physical health benefits that include improved cardiovascular, respiratory and metabolic profiles, and improved wellness. There is limited evidence related to golf and mental health. The incidence of golfing injury is moderate, with back injuries the most frequent. Accidental head injuries are rare, but can have serious consequences. CONCLUSIONS: Practitioners and policymakers can be encouraged to support more people to play golf, due to associated improved physical health and mental well-being, and a potential contribution to increased life expectancy. Injuries and illnesses associated with golf have been identified, and risk reduction strategies are warranted. Further research priorities include systematic reviews to further explore the cause and effect nature of the relationships described. Research characterising golf's contribution to muscular strengthening, balance and falls prevention as well as further assessing the associations and effects between golf and mental health are also indicated

Research Exploring Physical Activity in Care Homes (REACH): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background: As life expectancy increases and the number of older people, particularly those aged 85 years and over, expands there is an increase in demand for long-term care. A large proportion of people in a care home setting spend most of their time sedentary, and this is one of the leading preventable causes of death. Encouraging residents to engage in more physical activity could deliver benefits in terms of physical and psychological health, and quality of life. This study is the final stage of a programme of research to develop and preliminarily test an evidence-based intervention designed to enhance opportunities for movement amongst care home residents, thereby increasing levels of physical activity. Methods/design: This is a cluster randomised feasibility trial, aiming to recruit at least 8–12 residents at each of 12 residential care homes across Yorkshire, UK. Care homes will be randomly allocated on a 1:1 basis to receive either the intervention alongside usual care, or to continue to provide usual care alone. Assessment will be undertaken with participating residents at baseline (prior to care home randomisation) and at 3, 6, and 9 months post-randomisation. Data relating to changes in physical activity, physical function, level of cognitive impairment, mood, perceived health and wellbeing, and quality of life will be collected. Data at the level of the home will also be collected and will include staff experience of care, and changes in the numbers and types of adverse events residents experience (for example, hospital admissions, falls). Details of National Health Service (NHS) usage will be collected to inform the economic analysis. An embedded process evaluation will obtain information to test out the theory of change underpinning the intervention and its acceptability to staff and residents. Discussion: This feasibility trial with embedded process evaluation and collection of health economic data will allow us to undertake detailed feasibility work to inform a future large-scale trial. It will provide valuable information to inform research procedures in this important but challenging area

“Keeping Moving”: factors associated with sedentary behaviour among older people recruited to an exercise promotion trial in general practice

Background Sedentary behaviour is detrimental to health, even in those who achieve recommended levels of physical activity. Efforts to increase physical activity in older people so that they reach beneficial levels have been disappointing. Reducing sedentary behaviour may improve health and be less demanding of older people, but it is not clear how to achieve this. We explored the characteristics of sedentary older people enrolled into an exercise promotion trial to gain insights about those who were sedentary but wanted to increase activity. Method Participants in the ProAct65+ trial (2009–2013) were categorised as sedentary or not using a self-report questionnaire. Demographic data, health status, self-rated function and physical test performance were examined for each group. 1104 participants aged 65 & over were included in the secondary analysis of trial data from older people recruited via general practice. Results were analysed using logistic regression with stepwise backward elimination. Results Three hundred eighty seven (35 %) of the study sample were characterised as sedentary. The likelihood of being categorised as sedentary increased with an abnormal BMI (25 kg/m2) (Odds Ratio 1.740, CI 1.248–2.425), ever smoking (OR 1.420, CI 1.042–1.934) and with every additional medication prescribed (OR 1.069, CI 1.016–1.124). Participants reporting better self-rated physical health (SF-12) were less likely to be sedentary; (OR 0.961, 0.936–0.987). Participants’ sedentary behaviour was not associated with gender, age, income, education, falls, functional fitness, quality of life or number of co-morbidities. Conclusion Some sedentary older adults will respond positively to an invitation to join an exercise study. Those who did so in this study had poor self-rated health, abnormal BMI, a history of smoking, and multiple medication use, and are therefore likely to benefit from an exercise intervention

The contribution of office work to sedentary behaviour associated risk

Background: Sedentary time has been found to be independently associated with poor health and mortality. Further, a greater proportion of the workforce is now employed in low activity occupations such as office work. To date, there is no research that specifically examines the contribution of sedentary work to overall sedentary exposure and thus risk. The purpose of the study was to determine the total exposure and exposure pattern for sedentary time, light activity and moderate/vigorous physical activity (MVPA) of office workers during work and non-work time.Methods: 50 office workers from Perth, Australia wore an Actical (Phillips, Respironics) accelerometer during waking hours for 7 days (in 2008–2009). Participants recorded wear time, waking hours, work hours and daily activities in an activity diary. Time in activity levels (as percentage of wear time) during work and non-work time were analysed using paired t-tests and Pearson’s correlations.Results: Sedentary time accounted for 81.8% of work hours (light activity 15.3% and MVPA 2.9%), which was significantly greater than sedentary time during non-work time (68.9% p 30 minutes) and significantly less brief duration (0–10 minutes) light intensity activity during work hours compared to non-work time (p < 0.001). Further, office workers had fewer breaks in sedentary time during work hours compared to non-work time (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Office work is characterised by sustained sedentary time and contributes significantly to overall sedentary exposure of office workers