Attitudes to ageing and objectively-measured sedentary and walking behaviour in older people: the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936

Background:Prolonged sitting and low activity—both common in older people—are associated with increased mortality and poorer health. Whether having a more negative attitude to ageing is associated with higher levels of these behaviours is unclear.Objective:We investigated the prospective relationship between attitudes to ageing and objectively measured sedentary and walking behaviour.Methods:Participants were 271 members of the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936. At age 72 years, participants completed the Attitudes to Ageing Questionnaire which assesses attitudes on three domains—Psychosocial loss, Physical change and Psychological growth. At age 79 years, participants wore an activPAL activity monitor for seven days. The outcome measures were average daily time spent sedentary, number of sit-to-stand transitions, and step count.Results:There were no significant associations between any of the Attitude to Ageing domain scores and time spent sedentary or number of sit-to-stand transitions. In sex-adjusted analysis, having a more positive attitude to ageing as regards Physical change was associated with a slightly higher daily step count, for a SD increment in score, average daily step count was greater by 1.5% (95% CI 0.6%, 2.4%). On further adjustment for potential confounding factors these associations were no longer significant.Conclusion:We found no evidence that attitudes to ageing at age 72 were predictive of sedentary or walking behaviour seven years later. Future studies should examine whether attitudes to ageing are associated with objectively measured walking or sedentary behaviour at the same point in time. The existence of such an association could inform the development of interventions.<br/

Reliability, minimal detectable change and responsiveness to change: indicators to select the best method to measure sedentary behaviour in older adults in different study designs

Introduction : Prolonged sedentary behaviour (SB) is associated with poor health. It is unclear which SB measure is most appropriate for interventions and population surveillance to measure and interpret change in behaviour in older adults. The aims of this study: to examine the relative and absolute reliability, Minimal Detectable Change (MDC) and responsiveness to change of subjective and objective methods of measuring SB in older adults and give recommendations of use for different study designs. Methods : SB of 18 older adults (aged 71 (IQR 7) years) was assessed using a systematic set of six subjective tools, derived from the TAxonomy of Self report Sedentary behaviour Tools (TASST), and one objective tool (activPAL3c), over 14 days. Relative reliability (Intra Class Correlation coefficients-ICC), absolute reliability (SEM), MDC, and the relative responsiveness (Cohen's d effect size (ES) and Guyatt's Responsiveness coefficient (GR)) were calculated for each of the different tools and ranked for different study designs. Results : ICC ranged from 0.414 to 0.946, SEM from 36.03 to 137.01 min, MDC from 1.66 to 8.42 hours, ES from 0.017 to 0.259 and GR from 0.024 to 0.485. Objective average day per week measurement ranked as most responsive in a clinical practice setting, whereas a one day measurement ranked highest in quasi-experimental, longitudinal and controlled trial study designs. TV viewing Previous Week Recall (PWR) ranked as most responsive subjective measure in all study designs. Conclusions : The reliability, Minimal Detectable Change and responsiveness to change of subjective and objective methods of measuring SB is context dependent. Although TV viewing-PWR is the more reliable and responsive subjective method in most situations, it may have limitations as a reliable measure of total SB. Results of this study can be used to guide choice of tools for detecting change in sedentary behaviour in older adults in the contexts of population surveillance, intervention evaluation and individual care

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.</p

Sitting as a moral practice : older adults’ accounts from qualitative interviews on sedentary behaviours

Amidst public health campaigns urging people to sit less as well as being more physically active, this paper investigates how older adults make sense of their sedentary behaviour. Using an accounts framework focusing on how people rationalise their sitting practices, we analysed data from 44 qualitative interviews with older adults. All interviewees had received information about sedentary behaviour and health, visual feedback on their own objectively measured sitting over a week and guidance on sitting less. Participants used accounts to position sitting as a moral practice, distinguishing between 'good' (active/'busy') and 'bad' (passive/'not busy') sitting. This allowed them to align themselves with acceptable (worthwhile) forms of sitting and distance themselves from other people whose sitting they viewed as less worthwhile. However, some participants also described needing to sit more as they got older. The findings suggest that some public health messaging may lead to stigmatisation around sitting. Future sedentary behaviour guidelines and public health campaigns should consider more relatable guidelines that consider the lived realities of ageing, and the individual and social factors that shape them. They should advocate finding a balance between sitting and moving that is appropriate for each person

The epigenetic clock and objectively measured sedentary and walking behavior in older adults: The Lothian Birth Cohort 1936

Background: Estimates of biological age derived from DNA-methylation patterns-known as the epigenetic clock-are associated with mortality, physical and cognitive function, and frailty, but little is known about their relationship with sedentary behavior or physical activity. We investigated the cross-sectional relationship between two such estimates of biological age and objectively measured sedentary and walking behavior in older people. Methods: Participants were 248 members of the Lothian Birth Cohort 1936. At age 79 years, sedentary behavior and physical activity were measured over 7 days using an activPAL activity monitor. Biological age was estimated using two measures of DNA methylation-based age acceleration-i.e., extrinsic and intrinsic epigenetic age acceleration. We used linear regression to assess the relationship between these two estimates of biological age and average daily time spent sedentary, number of sit-to-stand transitions, and step count. Results: Of the six associations examined, only two were statistically significant in initial models adjusted for age and sex alone. Greater extrinsic age acceleration was associated with taking fewer steps (regression coefficient (95% CI) - 0.100 (- 0.008, - 0.001), and greater intrinsic age acceleration was associated with making more sit-to-stand transitions (regression coefficient (95% CI) 0.006 (0.0001, 0.012). When we controlled for multiple statistical testing, neither of these associations survived correction (both P ≥ 0.17). Conclusion: In this cross-sectional study of 79-year-olds, we found no convincing evidence that biological age, as indexed by extrinsic or intrinsic epigenetic age acceleration, was associated with objectively measured sedentary or walking behavior.</p