Reallocating sedentary time to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity but not to light-intensity physical activity is effective to reduce adiposity among youths: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 1088-1095 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. García-Hermoso ◽  
J. M. Saavedra ◽  
R. Ramírez-Vélez ◽  
U. Ekelund ◽  
B. del Pozo-Cruz
Author(s):  
Shanhu Qiu ◽  
Xue Cai ◽  
Lijing Jia ◽  
Zilin Sun ◽  
Tongzhi Wu ◽  
...  

Abstract Aims Current physical activity guidelines emphasize little on light-intensity physical activity (LPA) in terms of reducing the risk of cardiovascular mortality. This meta-analysis aimed to bridge this gap by assessing their association using objectively measured LPA data. Methods and results Databases of PubMed and Scopus were searched to April 2020 for prospective cohort studies that reported the association of LPA assessed by activity monitors with the risk of cardiovascular mortality in the general population. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a random-effects model. Dose–response and subgroup analyses were also performed. Six cohort studies with seven datasets enrolling 13 960 participants were included. LPA was all measured by accelerometers. The HR of LPA per 30 min/day for cardiovascular mortality was pooled to be 0.80 (95% CI 0.67–0.96). This association was non-linearly shaped (Pnonlinearity < 0.01) and unaffected by sex difference. Moreover, substituting LPA for sedentary time of 30 min/day lowered the risk of cardiovascular mortality by 16% (95% CI 0.73–0.96). Results showed further that LPA was inferior to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in reducing the risk of cardiovascular mortality when performed with an equal time-length set at 30 min/day (HR 0.83 vs. 0.54, Pcomparison = 0.046), but became comparable if at an equal activity-amount set at 150 metabolic equivalents-min/day (HR 0.67 vs. 0.54, Pcomparison = 0.41). Conclusion LPA shows potential in reducing the risk of cardiovascular mortality, and interventions targeting at LPA improvement are worth being encouraged.


2021 ◽  
pp. bjsports-2020-103140
Author(s):  
Rodney K Dishman ◽  
Cillian P McDowell ◽  
Matthew Payton Herring

ObjectiveTo explore whether physical activity is inversely associated with the onset of depression, we quantified the cumulative association of customary physical activity with incident depression and with an increase in subclinical depressive symptoms over time as reported from prospective observational studies.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesMEDLINE, PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES and CINAHL Complete databases, supplemented by Google Scholar.Eligibility criteriaProspective cohort studies in adults, published prior to January 2020, reporting associations between physical activity and depression.Study appraisal and synthesisMultilevel random-effects meta-analysis was performed adjusting for study and cohort or region. Mixed-model meta-regression of putative modifiers.ResultsSearches yielded 111 reports including over 3 million adults sampled from 11 nations in five continents. Odds of incident cases of depression or an increase in subclinical depressive symptoms were reduced after exposure to physical activity (OR, 95% CI) in crude (0.69, 0.63 to 0.75; I2=93.7) and adjusted (0.79, 0.75 to 0.82; I2=87.6) analyses. Results were materially the same for incident depression and subclinical symptoms. Odds were lower after moderate or vigorous physical activity that met public health guidelines than after light physical activity. These odds were also lower when exposure to physical activity increased over time during a study period compared with the odds when physical activity was captured as a single baseline measure of exposure.ConclusionCustomary and increasing levels of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity in observational studies are inversely associated with incident depression and the onset of subclinical depressive symptoms among adults regardless of global region, gender, age or follow-up period.


Author(s):  
Paddy C. Dempsey ◽  
Stuart J. H. Biddle ◽  
Matthew P. Buman ◽  
Sebastien Chastin ◽  
Ulf Ekelund ◽  
...  

Abstract Background In 2018, the World Health Organisation (WHO) commenced a program of work to update the 2010 Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health, for the first-time providing population-based guidelines on sedentary behaviour. This paper briefly summarizes and highlights the scientific evidence behind the new sedentary behaviour guidelines for all adults and discusses its strengths and limitations, including evidence gaps/research needs and potential implications for public health practice. Methods An overview of the scope and methods used to update the evidence is provided, along with quality assessment and grading methods for the eligible new systematic reviews. The literature search update was conducted for WHO by an external team and reviewers used the AMSTAR 2 (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews) tool for critical appraisal of the systematic reviews under consideration for inclusion. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method was used to rate the certainty (i.e. very low to high) of the evidence. Results The updated systematic review identified 22 new reviews published from 2017 up to August 2019, 14 of which were incorporated into the final evidence profiles. Overall, there was moderate certainty evidence that higher amounts of sedentary behaviour increase the risk for all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cancer mortality, as well as incidence of CVD, cancer, and type 2 diabetes. However, evidence was deemed insufficient at present to set quantified (time-based) recommendations for sedentary time. Moderate certainty evidence also showed that associations between sedentary behaviour and all-cause, CVD and cancer mortality vary by level of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), which underpinned additional guidance around MVPA in the context of high sedentary time. Finally, there was insufficient or low-certainty systematic review evidence on the type or domain of sedentary behaviour, or the frequency and/or duration of bouts or breaks in sedentary behaviour, to make specific recommendations for the health outcomes examined. Conclusions The WHO 2020 guidelines are based on the latest evidence on sedentary behaviour and health, along with interactions between sedentary behaviour and MVPA, and support implementing public health programmes and policies aimed at increasing MVPA and limiting sedentary behaviour. Important evidence gaps and research opportunities are identified.


2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Po‐Wen Ku ◽  
Mark Hamer ◽  
Yung Liao ◽  
Ming‐Chun Hsueh ◽  
Li‐Jung Chen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document