Time spent in sedentary posture is associated with waist circumference and cardiovascular risk

Tigbe, William W.; Granat, Malcolm H.; Sattar, Naveed; Lean, Mike

doi:10.1038/ijo.2017.30

Cited by 50 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fifteen papers reported no significant association between sedentary time and HDL‐C . Sedentary time and low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) were positively associated in two papers , neither of which was adjusted for PA. Twelve papers found no significant association between sedentary time and LDL‐C . The association between sedentary time and total cholesterol was positive in one paper ; however, no adjustment was made for PA.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…From the included papers, 10 came from NHANES , three from AusDiab , three from the Whitehall II Study , two from HSE , two from RISC study and one each from the Generation 100 Study , EVIDENT study , Leuven Longitudinal Study on Lifestyle, Fitness and Health (LLSLFH) , Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCPIS) , International Physical Activity and the Environment Network Adult Study , New Method for Objective Measurements of Physical Activity in Daily Living study , Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos and Canadian Health Measures Survey . The remaining 16 papers were all individual/stand‐alone studies . For the meta‐analysis, the aggregated sample size and mean age ( n , years) for the five included health markers were fasting glucose (25,356, 41.6), fasting insulin (10,474, 37.0), triglycerides (26,562, 42.4), HDL‐C (29,582, 46.1) and waist circumference (16,842, 44.6).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One paper reported a positive association between sedentary time and body mass (71), which was reduced to nonsignificance following adjustment for MVPA. Three other papers reported no significant association between sedentary time and body mass (32,46,58). No associations were reported for either fat mass (71) or lean mass (71).…”

Section: Body Mass and Body Composition Measuresmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…When SDs were not provided, SD was estimated from standard error (SE) (33, 35,43,48,49) or 95% confidence interval (CI) (29,50). When exact means were not provided, standard mean difference was converted from unadjusted correlation coefficients and estimated SE r (41,42,(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59) or converted from unadjusted odds ratio and estimated SE OR (36,60) according to accepted methods (51)(52)(53). Increased values of each health outcome compared to the lowest level of sedentary time resulted in a positive effect size.…”

Section: Effect Size Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The cross‐sectional associations between objectively measured sedentary time and cardiometabolic health markers in adults – a systematic review with meta‐analysis component

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sedentary time is viewed as an independent risk factor for adverse cardiometabolic health (CMH). No systematic review and meta-analysis on the cross-sectional associations between objectively measured sedentary time and CMH markers has been conducted. PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection were searched for papers that examined the cross-sectional association between objectively measured sedentary time and CMH markers in adults. Forty-six papers met the inclusion criteria. The included papers had a combined sample size of 70,576 and an age range of 18-87 years. To examine the effect of increased levels of sedentary time on CMH markers, data on effect sizes and moderators were extracted, where possible. By pooling the unadjusted data from the included papers, increased sedentary time was shown to have a significant detrimental association with fasting glucose (Δ = 0.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.02, 0.23), fasting insulin (Δ = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.32), triglycerides (Δ = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.14, 0.37), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (Δ = -0.20, 95% CI: -0.28, -0.13) and waist circumference (Δ = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.15, 0.35). How sedentary time was quantified and the device used to measure sedentary time significantly influence the size of the effect reported. Future interventions focused on both decreasing sedentary time and increasing physical activity may be the most effective strategy to improve CMH.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Body Mass and Body Composition Measuresmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Effect Size Calculationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The cross‐sectional associations between objectively measured sedentary time and cardiometabolic health markers in adults – a systematic review with meta‐analysis component

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The rise in the prevalence of such activities has led to the notion of a major shift in posture allocation from standing in favor of sitting on a population basis. With this belief has come a myriad of correlative analyses showing a positive relationship between sitting time and cardiometabolic disease risk (Henson et al, 2016; Young et al, 2016; Tigbe et al, 2017). In addition, studies have now shown that obese individuals spend significantly more time sitting and less time standing than their lean counterparts (Levine et al, 2005; Johannsen et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Posture Allocation Revisited: Breaking the Sedentary Threshold of Energy Expenditure for Obesity Management

Miles-Chan

Dulloo

2017

Front. Physiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is increasing recognition that low-intensity physical activities of daily life play an important role in achieving energy balance and that their societal erosion through substitution with sedentary (mostly sitting) behaviors, whether occupational or for leisure, impact importantly on the obesity epidemic. This has generated considerable interest for better monitoring, characterizing, and promoting countermeasures to sedentariness through a plethora of low-level physical activities (e.g., active workstations, standing desks, sitting breaks), amid the contention that altering posture allocation (lying, sitting, standing) can modify energy expenditure to impact upon body weight regulation and health. In addressing this contention, this paper first revisits the past and more recent literature on postural energetics, with particular emphasis on potential determinants of the large inter-individual variability in the energy cost of standing and the impact of posture on fat oxidation. It subsequently analyses the available data pertaining to various strategies by which posture allocations, coupled with light physical activity, may increase energy expenditure beyond the sedentary threshold, and their relevance as potential targets for obesity management.

show abstract

Walk with a Doc—a Call to Action for Physician-Led Walking Programs

Sabgir

Dorn

2020

Curr Cardiol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review An abundance of data supports the health benefits of physical activity, social connectedness, and spending time outdoors. Yet, a majority of Americans are living lives that are sedentary, lonely, and not connected with nature. We have three primary goals in writing this paper. First, we will review the well-documented health challenges arising from a sedentary, isolated lifestyle. Second, we will discuss the benefits of walking as a primary means of increasing physical activity. Finally, we will shine a light on the exponential success of Walk with a Doc, a national non-profit organization. Walk with a Doc focuses on bringing physician-led enthusiasm into our communities by organizing regular doctor-led walks in the outdoors; as well as Walk with a Future Doc, which encourages medical students to start their own Walk with a Doc programs. Recent Findings The Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans share that physical activity is an important action that people of all ages can take to improve their health. These guidelines recommend that adults partake in at least 150 min of moderate aerobic physical activity. Currently, only 23% of Americans are achieving this amount of aerobic activity. In addition, recent data suggest that 3 in 4 people are lonely, a significant social determinant of health. Finally, over half of all Americans spend fewer than 5 h outside each week. Walk with a Doc and Walk with a Future Doc are having an enormous impact on combating the negative effects of these health challenges. An evaluability assessment was completed in 2018 showing Walk with a Doc attendees felt the program increased their physical activity and their social connections, with a majority of Walk with a Doc gatherings occurring in nature. Physicians and other Walk with a Doc program leaders also reported high levels of satisfaction with their participation in Walk with a Doc. Summary As teammates in this healthcare fight, we are all painfully aware of the crisis on our hands. Of our patients, 70% are overweight or obese, nearly 80% of us are not getting enough physical activity, with all of this leading to billions of dollars in healthcare costs. Adding fuel to the fire, our doctors are burning out because of it. Today, we want to share what we have learned to be an extremely viable solution. The solution has the capacity to save 5 million lives and $68 billion dollars per year. Additionally, it is bolstering the job satisfaction and happiness of our providers. Personally, it turned my life around in 2005, and since then, it is now greater than 560 communities around the USA (and 34 other countries). We call it, simply, Walk with a Doc.

show abstract

Time spent in sedentary posture is associated with waist circumference and cardiovascular risk

Cited by 50 publications

References 51 publications

The cross‐sectional associations between objectively measured sedentary time and cardiometabolic health markers in adults – a systematic review with meta‐analysis component

The cross‐sectional associations between objectively measured sedentary time and cardiometabolic health markers in adults – a systematic review with meta‐analysis component

Posture Allocation Revisited: Breaking the Sedentary Threshold of Energy Expenditure for Obesity Management

Walk with a Doc—a Call to Action for Physician-Led Walking Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About