The association between accelerometer-measured patterns of sedentary time and health risk in children and youth: results from the Canadian Health Measures Survey

Colley, Rachel C.; Garriguet, Didier; Janssen, Ian; Wong, Sylvie Lo Fo; Saunders, Travis J.; Carson, Valerie; Tremblay, Mark S.

doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-200

Cited by 225 publications

(318 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

249

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…bouts of at least 5 or 10 min) is in line with previous studies (Saunders et al, 2013b;Carson et al, 2014;Harrington et al, 2011). In contrast to our finding that sedentary bouts longer than 20 min were rare among children, Colley et al (2013) found that bouts of at least 20, 40, 60, 80, 100 and 120 min were common in 6-19 year old children on weekdays after 3 PM. This contrasting result could be explained by the difference in tolerance minutes that were allowed within sedentary bouts.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…Currently, few epidemiological studies have examined accelerometerbased sedentary bouts and breaks in sedentary time in children (Colley et al, 2013;Carson and Janssen, 2011;Carson et al, 2014;Harrington et al, 2011;Saunders et al, 2013b). Although all these studies used similar accelerometer-based data (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…three studies used Actigraph models, one study used Actical and one study used ActivPAL), they used different operational definitions of sedentary bouts and breaks in sedentary time (Carson and Janssen, 2011;Harrington et al, 2011;Colley et al, 2013;Carson et al, 2014;Saunders et al, 2013b). In these studies, sedentary bout definitions ranged from periods of 15 s classified as sitting/ lying (Harrington et al, 2011) to periods of more than 120 min below the frequently used accelerometer cut-point for sedentary activity of 100 cpm (Colley et al, 2013). Strikingly, in two studies, up to a total of 20% of minutes within a sedentary bout was tolerated above this cutpoint (Carson and Janssen, 2011;Colley et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In these studies, sedentary bout definitions ranged from periods of 15 s classified as sitting/ lying (Harrington et al, 2011) to periods of more than 120 min below the frequently used accelerometer cut-point for sedentary activity of 100 cpm (Colley et al, 2013). Strikingly, in two studies, up to a total of 20% of minutes within a sedentary bout was tolerated above this cutpoint (Carson and Janssen, 2011;Colley et al, 2013). This implies that, for example, if 6 out of 30 min were not spent sedentary, this was still considered a sedentary bout.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, the few studies that examined the health effects of sedentary patterns in children and adolescents -varying in age between 6 and 19 years (46-55% males) - (Carson and Janssen, 2011;Carson et al, 2014;Colley et al, 2013;Saunders et al, 2013b), found inconsistent evidence for an association of sedentary time accumulated in bouts (number and/or duration) in sedentary time with health indicators in children. The different operational definitions of bouts and breaks in sedentary time may be one explanation for these inconsistent findings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Occurrence and duration of various operational definitions of sedentary bouts and cross-sectional associations with cardiometabolic health indicators: The ENERGY-project

Altenburg¹,

Niet²,

Verloigne

et al. 2015

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f oObjective. This study examined the occurrence and duration of sedentary bouts and explored the crosssectional association with health indicators in children applying various operational definitions of sedentary bouts.Methods. Accelerometer data of 647 children (10-13 years old) were collected in five European countries. We analyzed sedentary time (b 100 cpm) accumulated in bouts of at least 5, 10, 20 or 30 min based on four operational definitions, allowing 0, 30 or 60 s ≥100 cpm within bouts. Health indicators included anthropometrics (i.e. waist circumference and body mass index (BMI)) and in a subsample from two European countries (n = 112) fasting capillary blood levels of glucose, C-peptide, high-density-and low-density cholesterol, and triglycerides. Data collection took place from March to July 2010. Associations were adjusted for age, gender, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, total wear time and country.Results. Occurrence of sedentary bouts varied largely between the various definitions. Children spent most of their sedentary time in bouts of ≥5 min while bouts of ≥20 min were rare. Linear regression analysis revealed few significant associations of sedentary time accumulated in bouts of ≥5-30 min with health indicators. Moreover, we found that more associations became significant when allowing no tolerance time within sedentary bouts.Conclusion. Despite a few significant associations, we found no convincing evidence for an association between sedentary time accumulated in bouts and health indicators in 10-13 year old children. IntroductionRecent experimental studies in normal weight young (Altenburg et al., 2013;Peddie et al., 2013) and overweight adults (Dunstan et al., 2012) indicate that, compared to uninterrupted sitting, brief, light-or moderate-intensity breaks during prolonged sitting (i.e. 1 min 40 s breaks every 30 min) may attenuate cardiometabolic risk. These studies support the hypothesized mechanism that prolonged sitting leads to the loss of contractile stimulation in weight-bearing muscles, which suppresses skeletal muscle lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activity, leading to a prolonged time in which cellular metabolism substrates are present in the vascular compartments (Bey and Hamilton, 2003;Hamilton et al., 2004). These effects may contribute to the development of cardiovascular diseases. In contrast to studies in adults, brief light-intensity interruptions in sitting did not result in measurable changes in cardiometabolic indicators in 10-14 year old children (Saunders et al., 2013a).Currently, few epidemiological studies have examined accelerometerbased sedentary bouts and breaks in sedentary time in children (Colley Preventive Medicine 71 (2015)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Occurrence and duration of various operational definitions of sedentary bouts and cross-sectional associations with cardiometabolic health indicators: The ENERGY-project

Altenburg¹,

Niet²,

Verloigne

et al. 2015

Preventive Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Analysis of Hearing Loss and Physical Activity Among US Adults Aged 60-69 Years

Kuo

Ferrucci

et al. 2021

JAMA Netw Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Key Points Question Is there an association between hearing loss and physical activity? Findings In this cross-sectional study that included 291 adults aged 60 to 69 years, hearing loss was associated with a worse physical activity profile, including less moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, less light-intensity activity, and a more fragmented physical activity pattern. Meaning These findings suggest that promoting physical activity among older adults with hearing loss is important, and further research is needed to investigate whether hearing loss interventions could improve physical health profiles.

show abstract

Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ImportancePatients with atrial fibrillation (AF) experience poor functional capacity and quality of life (QOL). High-intensity interval training (HIIT) has been shown to elicit greater improvements in functional capacity and QOL compared with moderate to vigorous intensity continuous training (MICT) in other cardiovascular populations, yet HIIT remains understudied in AF.ObjectiveTo compare the effects of 12 weeks of HIIT and MICT-based cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR) on functional capacity and general QOL in patients with persistent and permanent AF. Disease-specific QOL, resting heart rate (HR), time in AF, and physical activity (PA) levels were also assessed.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis randomized clinical trial, conducted between November 17, 2015, and February 4, 2020, at a tertiary-care cardiovascular health center in Ottawa, Canada, recruited 94 patients with persistent and permanent AF.InterventionsHigh-intensity interval training (23 minutes: two 8-minute interval training blocks of 30-second work periods at 80%-100% of peak power output interspersed with 30-second recovery) or CR (60 minutes: continuous aerobic conditioning within 67%-95% of peak HR and 12-16 of 20 ratings of perceived exertion) twice weekly for 12 weeks.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcomes were changes in functional capacity (6-minute walk test [6MWT] distance) and general QOL (Short Form 36) from baseline to 12 weeks’ follow-up. Secondary outcomes included changes in disease-specific QOL (Atrial Fibrillation Severity Scale), resting HR, time in AF, and PA levels. An intention-to-treat analysis was used to compare changes between groups.ResultsOf the 94 patients who consented, 86 participated (mean [SD] age, 69 [7] years; 57 [66.3%] men). No significant differences in improvements in 6MWT distance (mean [SD], 21.3 [34.1] vs 13.2 [55.2] m; P = .42) and general QOL (Physical Component Summary, 0.5 [6.1] vs 1.1 [4.9] points; P = .87) between HIIT and CR were observed. No significant differences in improvements in disease-specific QOL (AF symptoms: −1.7 [4.3] vs −1.5 [4] points, P = .59), resting HR (−3.6 [10.6] vs −2.9 [12.4] beats per minute, P = .63), and moderate to vigorous PA levels (37.3 [93.4] vs 14.4 [125.7] min/wk; P = .35) between HIIT and CR were detected. Participants attended a mean (SD) of 18.3 (6.1) (75.1%) HIIT sessions and 20.0 (4.5) (83.4%) CR sessions (P = .36).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, twice-weekly 23-minute HIIT was as efficacious as twice-weekly 60-minute CR in improving functional capacity, general and disease-specific QOL, resting HR, and PA levels in patients with persistent and permanent AF.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02602457

show abstract

The association between accelerometer-measured patterns of sedentary time and health risk in children and youth: results from the Canadian Health Measures Survey

Cited by 225 publications

References 32 publications

Occurrence and duration of various operational definitions of sedentary bouts and cross-sectional associations with cardiometabolic health indicators: The ENERGY-project

Occurrence and duration of various operational definitions of sedentary bouts and cross-sectional associations with cardiometabolic health indicators: The ENERGY-project

Analysis of Hearing Loss and Physical Activity Among US Adults Aged 60-69 Years

Effect of High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About