Duration and breaks in sedentary behaviour: Accelerometer data from 1566 community-dwelling older men (British Regional Heart Study)

Background: Sedentary behaviours are increasingly recognised as raising risk of CVD events, diabetes and mortality, independently of physical activity (PA) levels. However, little is known about patterns of sedentary behaviour in older adults. Methods: Cross sectional study of 1566/3137 (50% response) men aged 71-91 years from a UK population-based cohort study. Men wore a GT3x accelerometer over the hip for one week in 2010-11. Mean daily minutes of SB, % of day in sedentary behaviours, sedentary bouts and breaks were calculated and summarized by health and demographic characteristics. Results: 1403 ambulatory men aged 78.4 years (SD 4.6 years) with ≥600 minutes of accelerometer wear on ≥3 days had complete data on covariables. Men spent on average 618 minutes (SD=83), or 72% of their day in sedentary behaviours (<100 counts/minute). On average men accumulated 72 spells of sedentary behaviours per day, with 7 breaks in each sedentary hour. Men had on average 5.1 sedentary bouts of ≥30 minutes, which accounted for 43% of sedentary time, and 1.4 bouts of ≥60 minutes, which accounted for 19% of daily sedentary time. Men who were over 80 years old, obese, depressed and had multiple chronic conditions accumulated more sedentary time and spent more time in longer sedentary bouts. Conclusions: Older men spend nearly three quarters of their day in sedentary behaviours, mostly accumulated in short bouts, although bouts lasting ≥30 minutes accounted for nearly half of the sedentary time each day. Men with medical risk factors were more likely to also display sedentary behaviour

Differences in context-specific sedentary behaviors according to weight status in adolescents, adults and seniors: a compositional data analysis

To develop effective sedentary behavior interventions aimed at people who are overweight/obese, detailed insight is needed into the contexts of sedentary behavior of these people. Therefore, the aims of this study were to describe the composition of sedentary behavior and to compare context-specific sedentary behaviors between different weight groups. Cross-sectional data were used from a study conducted in 2013-2014 among a Flemish sample of adolescents (n = 513), adults (n = 301), and seniors (n = 258). Sixteen context-specific sedentary behaviors were assessed using a validated questionnaire during the week and weekend. Compositional descriptive statistics were performed to determine the relative contribution of context-specific sedentary behaviors in the three age groups. Compositional multivariate analysis of covariance and pairwise comparisons were conducted to examine weight group differences in context-specific sedentary behaviors. The compositional means indicated that the highest proportion of sedentary time was spent at school, at work, and while watching television. Statistically significant differences were found in the composition of sedentary behaviors between healthy weight and overweight/obese participants. In all age groups, socially engaging sedentary behaviors were more prevalent in healthy weight people, whereas socially disengaging behaviors were more prevalent in overweight/obese people. Consequently, the findings of this study suggest that future overweight/obesity interventions should no longer focus on total sedentary time, as not all context-specific sedentary behaviors are associated with overweight/obesity. Instead, it might be better to target specific contexts of sedentary behaviorspreferably those less socially engagingwhen aiming to reduce overweight/obesity

Exploring the context of sedentary behaviour in older adults (what, where, why, when and with whom)

BACKGROUND: Older adults are the most sedentary segment of the population. Little information is available about the context of sedentary behaviour to inform guidelines and intervention. There is a dearth of information about when, where to intervene and which specific behaviours intervention should target. The aim of this exploratory study was to obtain objective information about what older adults do when sedentary, where and when they are sedentary and in what social context. METHODS: The study was a cross-sectional data collection. Older adults (Mean age = 73.25, SD ± 5.48, median = 72, IQR = 11) volunteers wore activPAL monitors and a Vicon Revue timelapse camera between 1 and 7 days. Periods of sedentary behaviour were identified using the activPAL and the context extracted from the pictures taken during these periods. Analysis of context was conducted using the Sedentary Behaviour International Taxonomy classification system. RESULTS: In total, 52 days from 36 participants were available for analysis. Participants spent 70.1 % of sedentary time at home, 56.9 % of sedentary time on their own and 46.8 % occurred in the afternoon. Seated social activities were infrequent (6.9 % of sedentary bouts) but prolonged (18 % of sedentary time). Participants appeared to frequently have vacant sitting time (41 % of non-screen sedentary time) and screen sitting was prevalent (36 % of total sedentary time). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable information to inform future interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour. Interventions should consider targeting the home environment and focus on the afternoon sitting time, though this needs confirmation in a larger study. Tackling social isolation may also be a target to reduce sedentary time

Identifying factors associated with sedentary time after stroke. Secondary analysis of pooled data from nine primary studies.

<p><b>Background</b>: High levels of sedentary time increases the risk of cardiovascular disease, including recurrent stroke.</p> <p><b>Objective</b>: This study aimed to identify factors associated with high sedentary time in community-dwelling people with stroke.</p> <p><b>Methods</b>: For this data pooling study, authors of published and ongoing trials that collected sedentary time data, using the activPAL monitor, in community-dwelling people with stroke were invited to contribute their raw data. The data was reprocessed, algorithms were created to identify sleep-wake time and determine the percentage of waking hours spent sedentary. We explored demographic and stroke-related factors associated with total sedentary time and time in uninterrupted sedentary bouts using unique, both univariable and multivariable, regression analyses.</p> <p><b>Results</b>: The 274 included participants were from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom, and spent, on average, 69% (SD 12.4) of their waking hours sedentary. Of the demographic and stroke-related factors, slower walking speeds were significantly and independently associated with a higher percentage of waking hours spent sedentary (p = 0.001) and uninterrupted sedentary bouts of <i>>30</i> and <i>>60 min</i> (p = 0.001 and p = 0.004, respectively). Regression models explained 11–19% of the variance in total sedentary time and time in prolonged sedentary bouts.</p> <p><b>Conclusion</b>: We found that variability in sedentary time of people with stroke was largely unaccounted for by demographic and stroke-related variables. Behavioral and environmental factors are likely to play an important role in sedentary behavior after stroke. Further work is required to develop and test effective interventions to address sedentary behavior after stroke.</p

Association Between Sedentary Time and Quality of Life From the Osteoarthritis Initiative: Who Might Benefit Most From Treatment?

Objective To investigate the relationship between sedentary behavior and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) among participants in the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Design Longitudinal, observational design. Setting Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort. Participants Individuals (N=1794) from a prospective, multicenter longitudinal cohort were classified into quantile groups based on average daily sedentary time (most sedentary, quartile 1 [Q1] ≥11.6h; 10.7h≤ Q2 Interventions Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures Individual QALYs were estimated over 2 years from the area under the curve of health-related utility scores derived from the Medical Outcomes Study 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey versus time. The relationship between baseline sedentary behavior and median 2-year QALYs was estimated using quantile regression adjusted for socioeconomic factors and body mass index. Results Lower QALYs over 2 years were more frequently found among the most sedentary (Q1, median 1.59), and QALYs increased as time spent in baseline sedentary behavior decreased (median QALYs for Q2, 1.64; Q3, 1.65; Q4, 1.65). The relationship of sedentary time and median QALY change was only significant for the most sedentary Q1 group, where an additional hour of sedentary behavior significantly reduced QALYs by −.072 (95% confidence interval, −.121 to −.020). Conclusions Our findings suggest that individuals with the most extreme sedentary profiles may be vulnerable to additional losses of quality of life if they become more sedentary. Targeting these individuals to decrease sedentary behavior has the potential to be cost-effective

Interventions for reducing sedentary behaviour in community-dwelling older adults

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: To identify the effects and assess the effectiveness of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour (total sedentary time and the pattern of accumulation of sedentary time) in older adults. To summarise the effects of interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour on quality of life, depression, and health status in older adults. To summarise any evidence on the cost-effectiveness of interventions that reduce sedentary behaviour in older adults

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

Definitions, measurement and prevalence of sedentary behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities – a systematic review

Supporting positive change in lifestyle behaviours is a priority in tackling the health inequalities experienced by adults with intellectual disabilities. In this systematic review, we examine the evidence on the definition, measurement and epidemiology of sedentary behaviour of adults with intellectual disabilities. A systematic literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, MEDLINE and Google Scholar was performed to identify studies published from 1990 up to October 2015. Nineteen papers met the criteria for inclusion in the systematic review. Many researchers do not distinguish between insufficient physical activity and sedentary behaviour. None of the studies reported the reliability and validity of the methods used to measure sedentary behaviour. Sedentary time, assessed objectively, ranged from 522 to 643 min/day: higher than in adults without intellectual disabilities. This first-ever review of sedentary behaviour and intellectual disabilities found that at present the evidence base is weak. Studies calibrating accelerometer data with criterion measures for sedentary behaviour are needed to determine specific cut-off points to measure sedentary behaviour in adults with intellectual disabilities. Researchers should also examine the reliability and validity of using proxy-report questionnaires to measure sedentary behaviour in this group. A better understanding of sedentary behaviour will inform the design of novel interventions to change lifestyle behaviours of adults with intellectual disabilities

Why older adults spend time sedentary and break their sedentary behavior: a mixed methods approach using life-logging equipment

Older adults are recommended to reduce their sedentary time to promote healthy ageing. To develop effective interventions identifying when, why, and how older adults are able to change their sitting habits is important. The aim of this mixed-method study was to improve our understanding of reasons for (breaking) sedentary behavior in older adults. Thirty older adults (74.0 [+/- 5.3] years old, 73% women) were asked about their believed reasons for (breaking) sedentary behavior, and about their actual reasons when looking at a personal storyboard with objective records of activPAL monitor data and time-lapse camera pictures showing all their periods of sedentary time in a day. The most often mentioned believed reason for remaining sedentary was television/radio (mentioned by 48.3%), while eating/drinking was most often mentioned as actual reason (96.6%). Only 17.2% believed that food/tea preparation was a reason to break up sitting, while this was an actual reason for 82.8% of the study sample. Results of this study show that there is a discrepancy between believed and actual reasons for (breaking) sedentary behavior. These findings suggest developing interventions utilizing the actual reasons for breaking sedentary behavior to reduce sedentary time in older adults

Reliability and validity of a domain-specific last 7-d sedentary time questionnaire

Purpose: The objective of this study is to examine test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and absolute agreement of a self-report, last 7-d sedentary behavior questionnaire (SIT-Q-7d), which assesses total daily sedentary time as an aggregate of sitting/lying down in five domains (meals, transportation, occupation, nonoccupational screen time, and other sedentary time). Dutch (DQ) and English (EQ) versions of the questionnaire were examined. Methods: Fifty-one Flemish adults (ages 39.4 +/- 11.1 yr) wore a thigh accelerometer (activPAL3 (TM)) and simultaneously kept a domain log for 7 d. The DQ was subsequently completed twice (median test-retest interval: 3.3 wk). Thigh-acceleration sedentary time was log annotated to create comparable domain-specific and total sedentary time variables. Four hundred two English adults (ages 49.6 +/- 7.3 yr) wore a combined accelerometer and HR monitor (Actiheart (R)) for 6 d to objectively measure total sedentary time. The EQ was subsequently completed twice (median test-retest interval: 3.4 wk). In both samples, the questionnaire reference frame overlapped with the criterion measure administration period. All participants had five or more valid days of criterion data, including one or more weekend day. Results: Test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (95% CI)) was fair to good for total sedentary time (DQ: 0.68 (0.50-0.81); EQ: 0.53 (0.44-0.62)) and poor to excellent for domain-specific sedentary time (DQ: from 0.36 (0.10-0.57) (meals) to 0.66 (0.46-0.79) (occupation); EQ: from 0.45 (0.35-0.54) (other sedentary time) to 0.76 (0.71-0.81) (meals)). For criterion validity (Spearman rho), significant correlations were found for total sedentary time (DQ: 0.52; EQ: 0.22; all P <0.001). Compared with domain-specific criterion variables (DQ), modest-to-strong correlations were found for domain-specific sedentary time (from 0.21 (meals) to 0.76 (P < 0.001) (screen time)). The questionnaire generally overestimated sedentary time compared with criterion measures. Conclusion: The SIT-Q-7d appears to be a useful tool for ranking individuals in large-scale observational studies examining total and domain-specific sitting