Associations of mutually exclusive categories of physical activity and sedentary time with markers of cardiometabolic health in English adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the Health Survey for England.
Associations of mutually exclusive categories of physical activity and sedentary time with markers of cardiometabolic health in English adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the Health Survey for England.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12889-016-2694-9
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-12
影响因子：
4.5
通讯作者：
Yates T
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bakrania K;Edwardson CL;Bodicoat DH;Esliger DW;Gill JM;Kazi A;Velayudhan L;Sinclair AJ;Sattar N;Biddle SJ;Khunti K;Davies M;Yates T
体力活动和久坐行为都单独与健康有关，然而，这些行为的组合对健康的影响程度还不太为人所知。这项研究的目的是在一个具有全国代表性的英国成年人样本中，检验客观测量的体力活动和久坐时间这四个相互排斥的类别与心脏代谢健康标志物的相关性。使用2008年英格兰健康调查数据集，2131名年龄在18岁以下、提供有效加速测量数据的参与者被纳入分析，并被归类为四个行为类别之一：(1)“忙碌的蜜蜂”：活动频繁且久坐不动；(2)“久坐锻炼者”：活动频繁且久坐不动；(3)“轻移动者”：不运动且久坐不动；以及(4)“沙发土豆”：不活动且久坐不动。体力活动的定义是每周积累至少150分钟的中等到剧烈的体力活动(MVPA)。“久坐不动”被定义为平均久坐时间与平均光强度体力活动时间之比的最低四分之一。加权多元线性回归模型对测量的混杂因素进行了调整，调查了不同行为类别的健康标记物的差异。此外，还探讨了持续体力活动和久坐水平与健康指标之间的关系，以及一些敏感性分析。与‘沙发土豆’相比，‘忙蜂’[体重指数：−1.67亿公斤/平方米(p <； 0.001)；腰围：−1.17亿厘米(p = 0.007)；糖化血红蛋白：−0.12%(p = 0.003)；高密度脂蛋白-胆固醇：0.09mmo1/L(p = 0.001)]，‘久坐运动者’[体重指数：−1.64亿公斤/m2(p <； 0.001)]；糖化血红蛋白：−0.11%(p = 0.009)；高密度脂蛋白-胆固醇：0.07mmo1/L(p <； 0.001)]和轻型组[高密度脂蛋白-胆固醇：0.11mmo1/L(p = 0.004)]是更有利的健康指标。连续分析与范畴分析一致，敏感度分析显示稳健性和稳定性。在这项全国性的英国成年人样本中，即使是那些久坐时间较长的人，体育活动也与更好的健康状况有关。与体力活动无关的低久坐时间与高密度脂蛋白-胆固醇呈正相关。本文的在线版本(doi：10.1186/s12889-0162694-9)包含补充材料，授权用户可以使用。
Both physical activity and sedentary behaviour have been individually associated with health, however, the extent to which the combination of these behaviours influence health is less well-known. The aim of this study was to examine the associations of four mutually exclusive categories of objectively measured physical activity and sedentary time on markers of cardiometabolic health in a nationally representative sample of English adults. Using the 2008 Health Survey for England dataset, 2131 participants aged ≥18 years, who provided valid accelerometry data, were included for analysis and grouped into one of four behavioural categories: (1) ‘Busy Bees’: physically active & low sedentary, (2) ‘Sedentary Exercisers’: physically active & high sedentary, (3) ‘Light Movers’: physically inactive & low sedentary, and (4) ‘Couch Potatoes’: physically inactive & high sedentary. ‘Physically active’ was defined as accumulating at least 150 min of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per week. ‘Low sedentary’ was defined as residing in the lowest quartile of the ratio between the average sedentary time and the average light-intensity physical activity time. Weighted multiple linear regression models, adjusting for measured confounders, investigated the differences in markers of health across the derived behavioural categories. The associations between continuous measures of physical activity and sedentary levels with markers of health were also explored, as well as a number of sensitivity analyses. In comparison to ‘Couch Potatoes’, ‘Busy Bees’ [body mass index: −1.67 kg/m2 (p < 0.001); waist circumference: −1.17 cm (p = 0.007); glycated haemoglobin: −0.12 % (p = 0.003); HDL-cholesterol: 0.09 mmol/L (p = 0.001)], ‘Sedentary Exercisers’ [body mass index: −1.64 kg/m2 (p < 0.001); glycated haemoglobin: −0.11 % (p = 0.009); HDL-cholesterol: 0.07 mmol/L (p < 0.001)] and ‘Light Movers’ [HDL-cholesterol: 0.11 mmol/L (p = 0.004)] had more favourable health markers. The continuous analyses showed consistency with the categorical analyses and the sensitivity analyses indicated robustness and stability. In this national sample of English adults, being physically active was associated with a better health profile, even in those with concomitant high sedentary time. Low sedentary time independent of physical activity had a positive association with HDL-cholesterol. The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-2694-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.