Fitness, Fatness and Active School Commuting among Liverpool Schoolchildren

Abstract

This study investigated differences in health outcomes between active and passive school commuters, and examined associations between parent perceptions of the neighborhood environment and active school commuting (ASC). One hundred-ninety-four children (107 girls), aged 9–10 years from ten primary schools in Liverpool, England, participated in this cross-sectional study. Measures of stature, body mass, waist circumference and cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) were taken. School commute mode (active/passive) was self-reported and parents completed the neighborhood environment walkability scale for youth. Fifty-three percent of children commuted to school actively. Schoolchildren who lived in more deprived neighborhoods perceived by parents as being highly connected, unaesthetic and having mixed land-use were more likely to commute to school actively (p < 0.05). These children were at greatest risk of being obese and aerobically unfit (p < 0.01). Our results suggest that deprivation may explain the counterintuitive relationship between obesity, CRF and ASC in Liverpool schoolchildren. These findings encourage researchers and policy makers to be equally mindful of the social determinants of health when advocating behavioral and environmental health interventions. Further research exploring contextual factors to ASC, and examining the concurrent effect of ASC and diet on weight status by deprivation is needed.

Is there a deprivation and maternal education gradient to child obesity and moderate‐to‐vigorous physical activity? Findings from the Millennium Cohort Study

“…Moreover, counter to what might be assumed, our analyses revealed that although the most deprived children were at greatest risk of overweight and central obesity, they were also most likely to achieve the MVPA guideline than less deprived peers. Similarly, a recent UK study found that children who lived in deprived neighbourhoods were most likely to commute to school actively yet were also at greatest risk of obesity . Disparities in weight status and central obesity in this study are likely to be related to other lifestyle factors not examined here, such as dietary intake.…”

Active Commuting and Physical Fitness: A Systematic Review

“…From the 11 studies focused on children/adolescents, four were performed in Spain, two in England, two in Norway, one in Sweden, one in Brazil, and one in Colombia. Furthermore, eight were cross-sectional [3,12,[27][28][29][30][31][32], one prospective cohort [33], one quasi-experimental [34], and one experimental [35]. The CRF was the PF attribute assessed the most (nine studies), while MF was assessed in three studies [3,27], and agility in two studies [3,31].…”

Health, Fitness, Lifestyle and Physical Competency of School Children in Wales

“…Congruent with previous studies conducted measuring muscular strength and cardiorespiratory fitness in children (Cohen et al, 2010;De Miguel-Etayo et al, 2014;Noonan et al, 2017), the current results showed that boys had a significantly higher grip strength and achieved a significantly greater 20m MSRT score than girls. Moreover, research has shown that boys have higher physical activity levels compared to girls (Tyler et al, 2016;Welsh Government, 2015a, 2017.…”

“…Although some recent UK studies have considered health-related fitness measures and socio-economic status in statistical analyses (Brophy, Rees, Knox, Baker, & Thomas, 2012;Charlton et al, 2014;Nevill, Duncan, Lahart, & Sandercock, 2017;Noonan, Boddy, Knowles, & Fairclough, 2016, 2017, there were inherent limitations. Specifically, the predominant focus was not comparing multiple fitness measures across socio-economic status, and the variation in health-related fitness variables included in these studies limits inter-study comparisons (Nevill et al, 2017;Noonan et al, 2016Noonan et al, , 2017. Additionally, these studies neglected to include any measure of the muscular strength component of physical fitness (Brophy et al, 2012;Charlton et al, 2014;Nevill et al, 2017;Noonan et al, 2016Noonan et al, , 2017.…”

“…Specifically, the predominant focus was not comparing multiple fitness measures across socio-economic status, and the variation in health-related fitness variables included in these studies limits inter-study comparisons (Nevill et al, 2017;Noonan et al, 2016Noonan et al, , 2017. Additionally, these studies neglected to include any measure of the muscular strength component of physical fitness (Brophy et al, 2012;Charlton et al, 2014;Nevill et al, 2017;Noonan et al, 2016Noonan et al, , 2017. Research has purported the need to assess this fitness component given its individual relationship with health outcomes (Ortega et al, 2008;Ruiz, Castro-Piñero, et al, 2009;Volaklis et al, 2015), with grip strength, specifically, having direct associations with cardio-metabolic disease risk and early mortality (Ortega et al, 2008;Volaklis et al, 2015).…”