Sitting too much: a hierarchy of socio-demographic correlates

Too much sitting (extended sedentary time) is recognized as a public health concern in Europe and beyond. Time spent sedentary is influenced and conditioned by clusters of individual-level and contextual (upstream) factors. Identifying population subgroups that sit too much could help to develop targeted interventions to reduce sedentary time. We explored the relative importance of socio-demographic correlates of sedentary time in adults across Europe. We used data from 26,617 adults who participated in the 2013 Special Eurobarometer 412 "Sport and physical activity". Participants from all 28 EU Member States were randomly selected and interviewed face-to-face. Self-reported sedentary time was dichotomized into sitting less or >7.5h/day. A Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection (CHAID) algorithm was used to create a tree that hierarchically partitions the data on the basis of the independent variables (i.e., socio-demographic factors) into homogeneous (sub)groups with regard to sedentary time. This allows for the tentative identification of population segments at risk for unhealthy sedentary behaviour. Overall, 18.5% of the respondents reported sitting >7.5h/day. Occupation was the primary discriminator. The subgroup most likely to engage in extensive sitting were higher educated, had white-collar jobs, reported no difficulties with paying bills, and used the internet frequently. Clear socio-demographic profiles were identified for adults across Europe who engage in extended sedentary time. Furthermore, physically active participants were consistently less likely to engage in longer daily sitting times. In general, those with more indicators of higher wealth were more likely to spend more time sitting

A cross-sectional study examining predictors of visit frequency to local green space and the impact this has on physical activity levels

Background Lack of physical activity (PA) is a growing public health concern. There is a growing body of literature that suggests a positive relationship may exist between the amount of local green space near one?s home and PA levels. For instance, park proximity has been shown to predict PA levels amongst certain populations. However, there is little evidence for the role of relatedness towards nature and perceptions of local green space on this relationship. The aim of this study was to examine, in a National UK sample, whether subjective indices associated with local green space were better predictors of visit frequency to local green space and PA levels compared to objectively measured quantity of local green space. Methods A cross-sectional survey was designed. From a random sample, 2079 working age adults responded to an online survey in September 2011. Demographics, self-reported PA, objective measures of the local environment (including local green space, road coverage, and environmental deprivation), were assessed in conjunction with perceptions of local green space and nature relatedness. Quantity of local green space was assessed by cross-referencing respondents? home postcodes with general land use databases. Regression models were conducted to assess which of our independent variables best predicted visit frequency to local green space and/or meeting PA guidelines. In addition, an ordinal regression was run to examine the relationship between visit frequency to local green space and the likelihood of meeting national PA guidelines. Results Nature relatedness was the strongest predictor for both visit frequency to local green space and meeting PA guidelines. Results show that perceived quality is a better predictor of visit frequency to local green space than objective quantity of local green space. The odds of achieving the recommended amount of PA was over four times greater for people who visited local green space once per week compared to never going (OR 4.151; 95 % CI, 2.40 to 7.17). Conclusions These results suggest that perceptions of local green space and nature relatedness play an important role in the relationship between local green space and PA. Considering the known health benefits of PA, our results are potentially important for public health interventions, policy making and environmental planning

Clustering of behavioural risk factors for health in UK adults in 2016: a cross-sectional survey (Forthcoming/Available Online)

Background Foods high in fat, sugar and salt (HFSS) are known to contribute to overweight and obesity. In addition to overweight and obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption and physical inactivity are known risk factors for non-communicable diseases, including several cancers and cardiovascular disease. Methods Secondary analysis of UK-representative cross-sectional survey data of 3293 adults aged 18+. Regression analyses were undertaken to understand the relationship between consumption of HFSS food and soft drinks, alcohol and tobacco and socio-demographics. Clustering analysis identified groupings of health risk factors. Results Males, those aged 18–24 and those from the more deprived groups consumed ready meals and fast food most frequently. Most of the sample (77.3%) engaged in at least one health risk behaviour. Six clusters were identified in the clustering analysis. Older (65+) female respondents were more likely to be inactive. Smokers exhibiting additional risk behaviours were more likely to be of working age from more deprived groups, and men over 65 were more likely to consume harmful levels of alcohol with additional risk factors. Conclusion Policies and services in the UK tend to focus on changing behaviour to address individual risk factors. This study shows that policies and interventions need to address multiple risk factors

Home-based health promotion for older people with mild frailty: the HomeHealth intervention development and feasibility RCT.

BACKGROUND: Mild frailty or pre-frailty is common and yet is potentially reversible. Preventing progression to worsening frailty may benefit individuals and lower health/social care costs. However, we know little about effective approaches to preventing frailty progression. OBJECTIVES: (1) To develop an evidence- and theory-based home-based health promotion intervention for older people with mild frailty. (2) To assess feasibility, costs and acceptability of (i) the intervention and (ii) a full-scale clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness randomised controlled trial (RCT). DESIGN: Evidence reviews, qualitative studies, intervention development and a feasibility RCT with process evaluation. INTERVENTION DEVELOPMENT: Two systematic reviews (including systematic searches of 14 databases and registries, 1990-2016 and 1980-2014), a state-of-the-art review (from inception to 2015) and policy review identified effective components for our intervention. We collected data on health priorities and potential intervention components from semistructured interviews and focus groups with older people (aged 65-94 years) (n = 44), carers (n = 12) and health/social care professionals (n = 27). These data, and our evidence reviews, fed into development of the 'HomeHealth' intervention in collaboration with older people and multidisciplinary stakeholders. 'HomeHealth' comprised 3-6 sessions with a support worker trained in behaviour change techniques, communication skills, exercise, nutrition and mood. Participants addressed self-directed independence and well-being goals, supported through education, skills training, enabling individuals to overcome barriers, providing feedback, maximising motivation and promoting habit formation. FEASIBILITY RCT: Single-blind RCT, individually randomised to 'HomeHealth' or treatment as usual (TAU). SETTING: Community settings in London and Hertfordshire, UK. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 51 community-dwelling adults aged ≥ 65 years with mild frailty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Feasibility - recruitment, retention, acceptability and intervention costs. Clinical and health economic outcome data at 6 months included functioning, frailty status, well-being, psychological distress, quality of life, capability and NHS and societal service utilisation/costs. RESULTS: We successfully recruited to target, with good 6-month retention (94%). Trial procedures were acceptable with minimal missing data. Individual randomisation was feasible. The intervention was acceptable, with good fidelity and modest delivery costs (£307 per patient). A total of 96% of participants identified at least one goal, which were mostly exercise related (73%). We found significantly better functioning (Barthel Index +1.68; p = 0.004), better grip strength (+6.48 kg; p = 0.02), reduced psychological distress (12-item General Health Questionnaire -3.92; p = 0.01) and increased capability-adjusted life-years [+0.017; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.001 to 0.031] at 6 months in the intervention arm than the TAU arm, with no differences in other outcomes. NHS and carer support costs were variable but, overall, were lower in the intervention arm than the TAU arm. The main limitation was difficulty maintaining outcome assessor blinding. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is lacking to inform frailty prevention service design, with no large-scale trials of multidomain interventions. From stakeholder/public perspectives, new frailty prevention services should be personalised and encompass multiple domains, particularly socialising and mobility, and can be delivered by trained non-specialists. Our multicomponent health promotion intervention was acceptable and delivered at modest cost. Our small study shows promise for improving clinical outcomes, including functioning and independence. A full-scale individually RCT is feasible. FUTURE WORK: A large, definitive RCT of the HomeHealth service is warranted. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014010370 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11986672. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 73. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Reliability and Validity of the Dutch Version of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire in Patients After Total Hip Arthroplasty or Total Knee Arthroplasty

<p>STUDY DESIGN: Psychometric assessment.</p><p>OBJECTIVES: To determine test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) in patients after total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty.</p><p>BACKGROUND: Despite recognized benefits of regular physical activity, little is known about the physical activity level of patients after total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty. None of the currently used questionnaires is internationally accepted. The IPAQ tries to address this problem, but its validity and reliability in those who have had a total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty are unknown.</p><p>METHODS: Forty-four patients completed the IPAQ (short and long forms) twice. Test-retest reliability was assessed by Spearman correlation coefficients (r) and intraclass correlation coefficients. Additionally, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were calculated. Concurrent validity was determined by an accelerometer. Spearman correlation coefficients were calculated between IPAQ scores and accelerometer data. Bland-Altman analyses were performed for both reliability and validity.</p><p>RESULTS: Fair to good correlation coefficients were found for test-retest reliability of the total and activity scores (r = 0.49-0.81, intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.27-0.71). Standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were large. For concurrent validity, weak to moderate correlation coefficients were found for total and activity scores (r = -0.07 to 0.54). Systematic bias was found between the IPAQ and accelerometer data, with higher scores on the IPAQ.</p><p>CONCLUSION: Overall, the IPAQ showed fair reliability and weak concurrent validity. These results are in line with previous studies of the reliability and validity of the IPAQ. Due to systematic bias and large standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change, the IPAQ may only be suitable for intergroup comparisons.</p>