Retirement-A Transition to a Healthier Lifestyle?: Evidence From a Large Australian Study

INTRODUCTION

Population aging is associated with a rising burden of non-communicable disease, profoundly impacting health policy and practice. Adopting and adhering to healthy lifestyles in middle or older age can protect against morbidity and mortality. Retirement brings opportunities to reconfigure habitual lifestyles and establish new routines. This study examines the longitudinal association between retirement and a range of lifestyle risk behaviors among a large population-based sample of Australian adults.

METHODS

Study sample included working adults aged ≥45 years at baseline (2006-2009, N=23,478-26,895). Lifestyle behaviors, including smoking, alcohol use, physical activity, diet, sedentary behavior, and sleep, were measured at both baseline and follow-up (2010). Logistic regression models estimated the odds of having each risk factor at follow-up and multiple linear regression models calculated the change in the total number of risk factors, adjusted for baseline risk and other covariates. Sociodemographic characteristics and reasons for retirement were tested as potential effect modifiers.

RESULTS

During the 3.3-year follow-up, about 11% of respondents retired. Retirement was associated significantly with reduced odds of smoking (AOR=0.74); physical inactivity (AOR=0.73); excessive sitting (AOR=0.34); and at-risk sleep patterns (AOR=0.82). There was no significant association between retirement and alcohol use or fruit and vegetable consumption. Change in the total number of lifestyle risk factors differed significantly by reason for retirement.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large population-based Australian cohort, retirement was associated with positive lifestyle changes. Health professionals and policymakers should consider developing special programs for retirees to capitalize on the healthy transitions through retirement.

Too much sitting and all-cause mortality: is there a causal link?

Background

Sedentary behaviours (time spent sitting, with low energy expenditure) are associated with deleterious health outcomes, including all-cause mortality. Whether this association can be considered causal has yet to be established.

Using systematic reviews and primary studies from those reviews, we drew upon Bradford Hill’s criteria to consider the likelihood that sedentary behaviour in epidemiological studies is likely to be causally related to all-cause (premature) mortality.

Methods

Searches for systematic reviews on sedentary behaviours and all-cause mortality yielded 386 records which, when judged against eligibility criteria, left eight reviews (addressing 17 primary studies) for analysis. Exposure measures included self-reported total sitting time, TV viewing time, and screen time. Studies included comparisons of a low-sedentary reference group with several higher sedentary categories, or compared the highest versus lowest sedentary behaviour groups. We employed four Bradford Hill criteria: strength of association, consistency, temporality, and dose–response. Evidence supporting causality at the level of each systematic review and primary study was judged using a traffic light system depicting green for causal evidence, amber for mixed or inconclusive evidence, and red for no evidence for causality (either evidence of no effect or no evidence reported).

Results

The eight systematic reviews showed evidence for consistency (7 green) and temporality (6 green), and some evidence for strength of association (4 green). There was no evidence for a dose–response relationship (5 red). Five reviews were rated green overall. Twelve (67 %) of the primary studies were rated green, with evidence for strength and temporality.

Conclusions

There is reasonable evidence for a likely causal relationship between sedentary behaviour and all-cause mortality based on the epidemiological criteria of strength of association, consistency of effect, and temporality.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3307-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Perspectives on a 'Sit Less, Move More' Intervention in Australian Emergency Call Centres

Background

Prolonged sitting is associated with increased risk of chronic diseases. Workplace programs that aim to reduce sitting time (sit less) and increase physical activity (move more) have targeted desk-based workers in corporate and university settings with promising results. However, little is known about ‘move more, sit less’ programs for workers in other types of jobs and industries, such as shift workers. This formative research examines the perceptions of a ‘sit less, move more’ program in an Australian Emergency Call Centre that operates 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

Methods

Participants were employees (N = 39, 72% female, 50% aged 36–55 years) recruited from Emergency Services control centres located in New South Wales, Australia. The ‘sit less, move more’ intervention, consisting of emails, posters and timer lights, was co-designed with the management team and tailored to the control centre environment and work practices, which already included electronic height-adjustable sit-stand workstations for all call centre staff. Participants reported their perceptions and experiences of the intervention in a self-report online questionnaire, and directly to the research team during regular site visits. Questionnaire topics included barriers and facilitators to standing while working, mental wellbeing, effects on work performance, and workplace satisfaction. Field notes and open-ended response data were analysed in an iterative process during and after data collection to identify the main themes.

Results

Whilst participants already had sit-stand workstations, use of the desks in the standing position varied and sometimes were contrary to expectations (e.g, less tired standing than sitting; standing when experiencing high call stress). Participants emphasised the “challenging” and “unrelenting” nature of their work. They reported sleep issues (“always tired”), work stress (“non-stop demands”), and feeling mentally and physically drained due to shift work and length of shifts. Overall, participants liked the initiative but acknowledged that their predominantly sitting habits were entrenched and work demands took precedence.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates the low acceptability of a ‘sit less, move more’ program in shift workers in high stress environments like emergency call centres. Work demands take priority and other health concerns, like poor sleep and high stress, may be more salient than the need to sit less and move more during work shifts.

Cross-sectional study of diet, physical activity, television viewing and sleep duration in 233,110 adults from the UK Biobank; the behavioural phenotype of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVES

Simultaneously define diet, physical activity, television (TV) viewing, and sleep duration across cardiometabolic disease groups, and investigate clustering of non-diet lifestyle behaviours.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional observational study.

SETTING

22 UK Biobank assessment centres across the UK.

PARTICIPANTS

502,664 adults aged 37-63 years old, 54% women. 4 groups were defined based on disease status; 'No disease' (n=103,993), 'cardiovascular disease' (CVD n=113,469), 'Type 2 diabetes without CVD' (n=4074) and 'Type 2 diabetes + CVD' (n=11,574).

MAIN OUTCOMES

Diet, physical activity, TV viewing and sleep duration.

RESULTS

People with 'CVD' report low levels of physical activity (<918 MET min/week, OR (95% CI) 1.23 (1.20 to 1.25)), high levels of TV viewing (>3 h/day; 1.42 (1.39 to 1.45)), and poor sleep duration (<7, >8 h/night; 1.37 (1.34 to 1.39)) relative to people without disease. People with 'Type 2 diabetes + CVD' were more likely to report low physical activity (1.71 (1.64 to 1.78)), high levels of TV viewing (1.92 (1.85 to 1.99)) and poor sleep duration (1.52 (1.46 to 1.58)) relative to people without disease. Non-diet behaviours were clustered, with people with 'CVD' or 'Type 2 diabetes + CVD' more likely to report simultaneous low physical activity, high TV viewing and poor sleep duration than those without disease (2.15 (2.03 to 2.28) and 3.29 (3.02 to 3.58), respectively). By contrast, 3 in 4 adults with 'Type 2 diabetes', and 2 in 4 adults with 'CVD' have changed their diet in the past 5 years, compared with only 1 in 4 in the 'No disease' group. Models were adjusted for gender, age, body mass index, Townsend Deprivation Index, ethnicity, alcohol intake, smoking and meeting fruit/vegetable guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

Low physical activity, high TV and poor sleep duration are prominent unaddressed high-risk characteristics of both CVD and type 2 diabetes, and are likely to be clustered together.

Do active design buildings change health behaviour and workplace perceptions?

BACKGROUND

Occupying new, active design office buildings designed for health promotion and connectivity provides an opportunity to evaluate indoor environment effects on healthy behaviour, sedentariness and workplace perceptions.

AIMS

To determine if moving to a health-promoting building changed workplace physical activity, sedentary behaviour, workplace perceptions and productivity.

METHODS

Participants from four locations at the University of Sydney, Australia, relocated into a new active design building. After consent, participants completed an online questionnaire 2 months before moving and 2 months after. Questions related to health behaviours (physical activity and sitting time), musculoskeletal issues, perceptions of the office environment, productivity and engagement.

RESULTS

There were 34 participants (60% aged 25-45, 78% female, 84% employed full-time); 21 participants provided complete data. Results showed that after the move participants spent less work time sitting (83-70%; P < 0.01) and more time standing (9-21%; P < 0.01), while walking time remained unchanged. Participants reported less low back pain (P < 0.01). Sixty per cent of participants in the new workplace were in an open-plan office, compared to 16% before moving. Participants perceived the new work environment as more stimulating, better lit and ventilated, but noisier and providing less storage. No difference was reported in daily physical activity, number of stairs climbed or productivity.

CONCLUSIONS

Moving to an active design building appeared to have physical health-promoting effects on workers, but workers' perceptions about the new work environment varied. These results will inform future studies in other new buildings.

Validity and responsiveness of four measures of occupational sitting and standing

Background

Evidence on the detrimental health effects of prolonged sedentary behavior is accumulating. Interventions need to have a specific focus on sedentary behavior in order to generate clinically meaningful decreases in sedentary time. When evaluating such intervention, the question whether a participant improved or deteriorated their behavior is fundamental and instruments that are able to detect those changes are essential. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the criterion validity against activPAL and responsiveness to change of two activity monitors (ActiGraph and activPAL) and two questionnaires for the assessment of occupational sitting and standing time.

Methods

42 participants took part in the Stand@Work intervention trial. Six (T0) and two (T1) weeks before they received a sit-stand workstation and three weeks thereafter (T2), participants wore an ActiGraph and an activPAL activity monitor, and completed the Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ) and the Workforce Sitting Questionnaire (WSQ). The activPAL was used as the criterion validity measure.

Results

The ActiGraph showed strong validity for occupational sedentary time at T0 and T1 (Spearman rho = 0.77 and 0.69), but its validity dropped substantially after introduction of the sit-stand workstation (rho = 0.19). Correlations between occupational light-intensity activity assessed by the ActiGraph and occupational standing time assessed by the activPAL varied between 0.25–0.63. The occupational sitting validity correlation of the OSPAQ and WSQ varied from 0.35-0.48 and 0.25-0.30, respectively, and between 0.16–0.68 for the OSPAQ for occupational standing time. The intervention-induced changes in occupational sitting and standing time were well detected by the activPAL, OSPAQ and WSQ (sitting only), but not by the ActiGraph, which had the lowest responsiveness to change.

Conclusions

This study suggests that studies aimed at determining differences in occupational sitting and standing time should use activPAL-type inclinometers as a preferred type of objective measure. Simple questionnaires showed sufficient validity and are usable in addition to an objective measure or alone when objective monitoring is not possible. The hip-worn ActiGraph was unable to distinguish between occupational sitting and standing time, when using uniaxial data and traditional cut-points for sedentary time and light-intensity activity.

Trial registration

The study was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (No. ACTRN 12612000072819).

Getting the message across: outcomes and risk profiles by awareness levels of the "measure-up" obesity prevention campaign in Australia

BACKGROUND

Obesity campaign evaluations have used campaign awareness to assess impact, yet have not compared unprompted campaign recallers, with prompted recallers and those with no campaign recall. Using data from an Australian mass-media obesity prevention campaign linking waist circumference and chronic disease we examined whether those with different degrees of campaign recall are distinct groups demographically and for subsequent campaign effects.

METHODS

A national cross-sectional telephone survey of randomly selected adults aged 18 to 65 years was conducted post- campaign (n = 2812) covering campaign recall, self-reported diet and physical activity (PA) and waist-measuring knowledge, behaviours and intentions to make lifestyle changes. Respondents were divided into three groups indicating campaign recall: Unprompted Recallers (n=1154); Prompted Recallers (n=1284); and No Recallers (n=374) and compared on demographic, knowledge, and behavioural risk factors for obesity/chronic disease.

RESULTS

Unprompted Recallers were more likely to speak English at home (p<.001), be in the primary campaign target group (25-45 years with children) (p<0.001) than the other two groups and to be university educated and female than the Prompted Recall group only (p=0.001). Unprompted Recallers had better knowledge about recommended waist circumference (p<.001), fruit (p=0.004), vegetable (p<0.001) and PA guidelines (p<0.001) than both the other groups. The No Recall group was less likely than the other two to be overweight/obese (46% vs 55%, p=0.020 and 54%, p=0.037), comparable on meeting fruit consumption and PA guidelines but more likely to meet vegetable intake recommendations (than Unprompted Recallers only).

CONCLUSIONS

Unprompted recallers were more knowledgeable about campaign messages; behaviour change and intentions to change were stronger for the two recall groups compared with the No Recall group but not different between them. The current analysis revealed subtle differences in campaign exposure and/or attendance by different demographic subgroups that would not be apparent in a simple aware/unaware dichotomy.

Standing time and all-cause mortality in a large cohort of Australian adults

OBJECTIVE

To determine the association between standing time and all-cause mortality.

METHODS

Prospective questionnaire data from 221,240 individuals from the 45 and Up Study were linked to mortality data from the New South Wales Registry of Deaths (Australia) from February 1, 2006 to June 17, 2012. Hazard ratios for all-cause mortality according to standing time at baseline were estimated in 2013 using Cox regression modelling, adjusted for sex, age, education, urban/rural residence, physical activity, sitting time, body mass index, smoking status, self-rated health and disability.

RESULTS

During 937,411 person years (mean follow-up=4.2 yr) 8009 deaths occurred. All-cause mortality hazard ratios were 0.90 (95% CI 0.85-0.95), 0.85 (95% CI 0.80-0.95), and 0.76 (95% CI 0.69-0.95) for standing 2-≤5h/d, 5-≤8h/d, or >8h/d respectively, compared to standing two or less hours per day. Further analyses revealed no significant interactions between standing and sex (p=0.93), the presence/absence of cardiovascular disease or diabetes (p=0.22), BMI (p=0.78), physical activity (p=0.16) and sitting time (p=0.22).

CONCLUSION

This study showed a dose-response association between standing time and all-cause mortality in Australian adults aged 45 years and older. Increasing standing may hold promise for alleviating the health risks of prolonged sitting.

The effectiveness of sit-stand workstations for changing office workers' sitting time: results from the Stand@Work randomized controlled trial pilot

Background

Prolonged sitting time is detrimental for health. Individuals with desk-based occupations tend to sit a great deal and sit-stand workstations have been identified as a potential strategy to reduce sitting time. Hence, the objective of the current study was to examine the effects of using sit-stand workstations on office workers’ sitting time at work and over the whole day.

Methods

We conducted a randomized controlled trial pilot with crossover design and waiting list control in Sydney, Australia from September 2011 to July 2012 (n = 42; 86% female; mean age 38 ± 11 years). Participants used a sit-stand workstation for four weeks in the intervention condition. In the time-matched control condition, participants received nothing and crossed over to the intervention condition after four weeks. The primary outcomes, sitting, standing and walking time at work, were assessed before and after using the workstations with ActivPALs and self-report questionnaires. Secondary outcomes, domain-specific sitting over the whole day, were assessed by self-report. Linear mixed models estimated changes in outcomes adjusting for measurement time, study grouping and covariates.

Results

Intervention participants significantly reduced objectively assessed time spent sitting at work by 73 min/workday (95% CI: −106,-39) and increased standing time at work by 65 min/workday (95% CI: 47, 83); these changes were significant relative to controls (p = 0.004 and p < 0.001, respectively). Total sitting time significantly declined in intervention participants (−80 min/workday; 95% CI: −155, −4).

Conclusions

This study shows that introducing sit-stand workstations in the office can reduce desk-based workers’ sitting time at work in the short term. Larger scale studies on more representative samples are needed to determine the public health impact of sit-stand workstations.

Trial registration

ACTRN12612000072819

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12966-014-0127-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

High sitting time or obesity: Which came first? Bidirectional association in a longitudinal study of 31,787 Australian adults

OBJECTIVE

Evidence on the direction of the association between sitting time and obesity is limited. The prospective associations between baseline total sitting time and subsequent changes in body mass index (BMI), and baseline BMI and subsequent changes in sitting time were examined.

METHODS

BMI, from self-reported height and weight, and a single-item measure of sitting time were ascertained at two time points (3.4 ± 0.96 years apart) in a prospective questionnaire-based cohort of 31,787 Australians aged 45-65 years without severe physical limitations.

RESULTS

In a fully adjusted model, baseline obesity was associated with increased sitting time among all participants (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.20 [95% CI, 1.11-1.30]; P < 0.001) and in most subgroups. The association was significant among those who were sitting <4 hours/day (aOR = 1.24 [95% CI, 1.07-1.44]; P = 0.004) and 4-8 hours/day at baseline (aOR=1.18 [95% CI, 1.06-1.32]; P = 0.003), but not in the high sitting groups (P = 0.111 and 0.188 for 8-11 and ≥11 sitting hours/day, respectively). Nonsignificant and inconsistent results were observed for the association between baseline sitting time and subsequent change in BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings support the hypothesis that obesity may lead to a subsequent increase in total sitting time, but the association in the other direction is unclear.

Desk-based workers' perspectives on using sit-stand workstations: a qualitative analysis of the Stand@Work study

Background

Prolonged sitting time has been identified as a health risk factor. Sit-stand workstations allow desk workers to alternate between sitting and standing throughout the working day, but not much is known about their acceptability and feasibility. Hence, the aim of this study was to qualitatively evaluate the acceptability, feasibility and perceptions of using sit-stand workstations in a group of desk-based office workers.

Methods

This article describes the qualitative evaluation of the randomized controlled cross-over Stand@Work pilot trial. Participants were adult employees recruited from a non-government health agency in Sydney, Australia. The intervention involved using an Ergotron Workfit S sit-stand workstation for four weeks. After the four week intervention, participants shared their perceptions and experiences of using the sit-stand workstation in focus group interviews with 4–5 participants. Topics covered in the focus groups included patterns of workstation use, barriers and facilitators to standing while working, effects on work performance, physical impacts, and feasibility in the office. Focus group field notes and transcripts were analysed in an iterative process during and after the data collection period to identify the main concepts and themes.

Results

During nine 45-min focus groups, a total of 42 participants were interviewed. Participants were largely intrinsically motivated to try the sit-stand workstation, mostly because of curiosity to try something new, interest in potential health benefits, and the relevance to the participant’s own and organisation’s work. Most participants used the sit-stand workstation and three common usage patterns were identified: task-based routine, time-based routine, and no particular routine. Common barriers to sit-stand workstation use were working in an open plan office, and issues with sit-stand workstation design. Common facilitators of sit-stand workstation use were a supportive work environment conducive to standing, perceived physical health benefits, and perceived work benefits. When prompted, most participants indicated they were interested in using a sit-stand workstation in the future.

Conclusions

The use of a sit-stand workstation in this group of desk-based office workers was generally perceived as acceptable and feasible. Future studies are needed to explore this in different desk-based work populations and settings.

Associations between socio-economic position and sedentary behaviour in a large population sample of Australian middle and older-aged adults: The Social, Economic, and Environmental Factor (SEEF) Study

OBJECTIVE

Socioeconomic position (SEP) is associated with health-related behaviours but little is known about the socioeconomic gradient of sedentary behaviour. This study aims to assess the associations between SEP and multiple indicators of sedentary behaviour among Australian mid-to-older age adults.

METHOD

Multivariate analysis of 60,404 (>47years, 26,366 in paid employment) participants in the Social, Economic, and Environmental Factor Study, examining the associations between SEP (educational attainment, household income, and an area-level index of socioeconomic advantage) and self-reported daily time for total sitting, TV viewing, computer use, and car driving. Data was collected in 2010 in New South Wales, Australia.

RESULTS

For participants in paid employment, we found positive associations with all SEP indicators for total sitting and computer use time, and inverse associations for TV viewing. Driving time was inversely associated with education level only. We observed similar but less pronounced patterns of associations among participants not in paid employment.

CONCLUSION

Higher SEP is linked to higher total sitting and computer time, particularly among those in paid employment, and lower TV viewing time.

Older adults' time in sedentary, light and moderate intensity activities and correlates: application of Australian Time Use Survey

OBJECTIVES

Understanding how older adults spend their time between active and sedentary activities is an important aspect of healthy ageing. This study examined the time spent in all-domains of sedentary, light and moderate intensity physical activities in old age and identified high-risk groups.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional analysis of Australian 2006 Time Use Survey.

METHODS

Participants comprised non-working older adults with at least one 24-h time use diary (n=992). Primary activities were recoded by activity domain and intensity. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to calculate the odds ratios of having high sedentary time, low light-intensity physical activity (LIPA), and being insufficiently active (<30 min/day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, MVPA) by sociodemographic variables.

RESULTS

Older adults spent 223 and 121 min/day of their waking time in LIPA and MVPA, respectively, mostly (88%) attributed to household chores. One third of participants spent ≥600 min/day in sedentary activities, 63% spent ≥180 min/day in LIPA, 85% achieved sufficient levels of MVPA by all domains, but only 30% of participants by the leisure/transport domains. Neither age nor socio-economic indicators were associated with insufficient MVPA. Marital status and living arrangement were significant correlates of low MVPA and LIPA but moderated by gender. The only correlate of high sedentary time (>10 h/day) was disability or long-term health condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of older Australians are sufficiently active when considering all domains. Household domain is the main source of LIPA and MVPA. In old age, prolonged sitting is associated with disability. Marital status and living arrangements can be used to identify physically inactive seniors.

Daily sitting time and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis

Objective

To quantify the association between daily total sitting and all-cause mortality risk and to examine dose-response relationships with and without adjustment for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity.

Methods

Studies published from 1989 to January 2013 were identified via searches of multiple databases, reference lists of systematic reviews on sitting and health, and from authors’ personal literature databases. We included prospective cohort studies that had total daily sitting time as a quantitative exposure variable, all-cause mortality as the outcome and reported estimates of relative risk, or odds ratios or hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Two authors independently extracted the data and summary estimates of associations were computed using random effects models.

Results

Six studies were included, involving data from 595,086 adults and 29,162 deaths over 3,565,569 person-years of follow-up. Study participants were mainly female, middle-aged or older adults from high-income countries; mean study quality score was 12/15 points. Associations between daily total sitting time and all-cause mortality were not linear. With physical activity adjustment, the spline model of best fit had dose-response HRs of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.98-1.03), 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99-1.05) and 1.05 (95% CI: 1.02-1.08) for every 1-hour increase in sitting time in intervals between 0-3, >3-7 and >7 h/day total sitting, respectively. This model estimated a 34% higher mortality risk for adults sitting 10 h/day, after taking physical activity into account. The overall weighted population attributable fraction for all-cause mortality for total daily sitting time was 5.9%, after adjusting for physical activity.

Conclusions

Higher amounts of daily total sitting time are associated with greater risk of all-cause mortality and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity appears to attenuate the hazardous association. These findings provide a starting point for identifying a threshold on which to base clinical and public health recommendations for overall sitting time, in addition to physical activity guidelines.

Evaluation of ergonomic and education interventions to reduce occupational sitting in office-based university workers: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prolonged sitting is a specific occupational hazard in office workers. There is growing evidence that prolonged sitting is detrimental to metabolic health. The aim of this study is to determine whether providing office workers with education along with adjustable sit-stand workstations leads to reduction in sitting behavior.

METHODS/DESIGN

A randomized control trial (RCT) with three groups (one control group and two intervention groups) will be conducted in an office workplace setting. The education intervention group will receive an education package that encourages reduction in sitting behaviors. The sit-stand desk intervention group will receive the same education package along with an adjustable sit-stand desk. Participants will be included in the study if they are currently employed in a full-time academic or administrative role that involves greater than 15 hours per week or greater than 4 hours per day computer-based work. Baseline data will include participant's age, gender, weight, height, smoking habit, employment position, level of education, and baseline self-reported leisure time physical activity. The primary outcome is the average daily sedentary time during work hours, measured by an accelerometer. Participant recruitment commenced in March 2013 and will be completed by December 2013.

DISCUSSION

This study will determine whether providing office workers with an adjustable sit-stand desk and individually targeted education, or education alone, is more effective in decreasing sitting behaviors than no intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12613000366752.

The prevalence and correlates of sitting in European adults - a comparison of 32 Eurobarometer-participating countries

Background

Prolonged sitting is an emerging health risk. However, multi-country comparative sitting data are sparse. This paper reports the prevalence and correlates of sitting time in 32 European countries.

Methods

Data from the Eurobarometer 64.3 study were used, which included nationally representative samples (n = 304-1,102) from 32 European countries. Face-to-face interviews were conducted during November and December 2005. Usual weekday sitting time was assessed using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (short-version). Sitting time was compared by country, age, gender, years of education, general health status, usual activity and physical activity. Multivariable-adjusted analyses assessed the odds of belonging to the highest sitting quartile.

Results

Data were available for 27,637 adults aged 15–98 years. Overall, mean reported weekday sitting time was 309 min/day (SD 184 min/day). There was a broad geographical pattern and some of the lowest amounts of daily sitting were reported in southern (Malta and Portugal means 194–236 min/day) and eastern (Romania and Hungary means 191–276 min/day) European countries; and some of the highest amounts of daily sitting were reported in northern European countries (Germany, Benelux and Scandinavian countries; means 407–335 min/day). Multivariable-adjusted analyses showed adults with low physical activity levels (OR = 5.10, CI₉₅ = 4.60-5.66), those with high sitting in their main daily activity (OR = 2.99, CI₉₅ = 2.74-3.25), those with a bad/very bad general health state (OR = 1.87, CI₉₅ = 1.63-2.15) and higher education levels (OR = 1.48, CI₉₅ = 1.38-1.59) were more likely to be in the highest quartile of daily sitting time. Adults within Greece (OR = 2.91, CI₉₅ = 2.51-3.36) and Netherlands (OR = 2.56, CI₉₅ = 2.22-2.94) were most likely to be in the highest quartile. High-sit/low-active participants comprised 10.1% of the sample. Adults self-reporting bad/very bad general health state (OR = 4.74, CI₉₅ = 3.97-5.65), those within high sitting in their main daily activities (OR = 2.87, CI₉₅ = 2.52-3.26) and adults aged ≥65 years (OR = 1.53, CI₉₅ = 1.19-1.96) and were more likely to be in the high-sit/low-active group.

Conclusions

Weekday sitting time and its demographic correlates varied considerably across European countries, with adults in north-western European countries sitting the most. Sitting is prevalent across Europe and merits attention by preventive interventions.

Sedentary behaviour and risk of mortality from all-causes and cardiometabolic diseases in adults: evidence from the HUNT3 population cohort

BACKGROUND

Sedentary behaviour is a potential risk factor for chronic-ill health and mortality, that is, independent of health-enhancing physical activity. Few studies have investigated the risk of mortality associated with multiple contexts of sedentary behaviour.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prospective associations of total sitting time, TV-viewing time and occupational sitting with mortality from all causes and cardiometabolic diseases.

METHODS

Data from 50,817 adults aged ≥20 years from the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study 3 (HUNT3) in 2006-2008 were linked to the Norwegian Cause of Death Registry up to 31 December 2010. Cox proportional hazards models examined all-cause and cardiometabolic disease-related mortality associated with total sitting time, TV-viewing and occupational sitting, adjusting for multiple potential confounders including physical activity.

RESULTS

After mean follow-up of 3.3 years (137,315.8 person-years), 1068 deaths were recorded of which 388 were related to cardiometabolic diseases. HRs for all-cause mortality associated with total sitting time were 1.12 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.42), 1.18 (95% CI 0.90 to 1.57) and 1.65 (95% CI 1.24 to 2.21) for total sitting time 4-<7, 7-<10 and ≥10 h/day, respectively, relative to <4 h/day after adjusting for confounders (p-trend=0.001). A similar pattern of associations was observed between total sitting time and mortality from cardiometabolic diseases, but TV-viewing time and occupational sitting showed no or borderline significant associations with all-cause or cardiometabolic disease-related mortality over the same follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Total sitting time is associated with all-cause and cardiometabolic disease-related mortality in the short term. However, prolonged sitting in specific contexts (ie, watching TV, at work) do not adversely impact health in the same timeframe. These findings suggest that adults should be encouraged to sit less throughout the day to reduce their daily total sitting time.

Non-occupational sedentary behaviors: population changes in The Netherlands, 1975-2005

BACKGROUND

Evidence is accumulating that sedentary behaviors have detrimental health effects. Comprehensive data on population changes in various sedentary behaviors over time are scarce.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine changes in non-occupational sedentary behaviors in the Dutch adult population between 1975 and 2005.

METHODS

The National Time Use Survey of the Netherlands was used, which has been collected in 5-year intervals since 1975 (seven time points, n range=1017-2845). Adult participants completed a 7-day time-use diary in which they recorded their primary activity in 15-minute intervals throughout or at the end of the day. A validated method was used to determine time spent in various non-occupational sedentary behaviors. Population-weighted analyses determining changes over time in various sedentary behaviors were carried out in 2011 and 2012.

RESULTS

Between 1975 and 2005, the proportion of non-occupational time spent sedentary remained relatively constant at ~60%. However, absolute time decreased, because of a 4.7-hour/week increase in occupational time. Sedentary occupational time could not be studied but has likely increased over these 3 decades. Most non-occupational sedentary behavior was during leisure, and the proportion of sedentary leisure time that comes from screen time increased from 26% in 1975 to 43% in 2005. Between 1975 and 2005, sedentary transport increased by 2 hours/week.

CONCLUSIONS

The nature and distribution of sedentary behaviors in the Dutch adult population changed substantially over 3 decades. Screen-based activities are playing an increasingly dominant role.

Validity of the occupational sitting and physical activity questionnaire

PURPOSE

Sitting at work is an emerging occupational health risk. Few instruments designed for use in population-based research measure occupational sitting and standing as distinct behaviors. This study aimed to develop and validate brief measure of occupational sitting and physical activity.

METHODS

A convenience sample (n = 99, 61% female) was recruited from two medium-sized workplaces and by word-of-mouth in Sydney, Australia. Participants completed the newly developed Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ) and a modified version of the MONICA Optional Study on Physical Activity Questionnaire (modified MOSPA-Q) twice, 1 wk apart. Participants also wore an ActiGraph accelerometer for the 7 d in between the test and retest. Analyses determined test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients and assessed criterion validity against accelerometers using the Spearman ρ.

RESULTS

The test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients for occupational sitting, standing, and walking for OSPAQ ranged from 0.73 to 0.90, while that for the modified MOSPA-Q ranged from 0.54 to 0.89. Comparison of sitting measures with accelerometers showed higher Spearman correlations for the OSPAQ (r = 0.65) than for the modified MOSPA-Q (r = 0.52). Criterion validity correlations for occupational standing and walking measures were comparable for both instruments with accelerometers (standing: r = 0.49; walking: r = 0.27-0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

The OSPAQ has excellent test-retest reliability and moderate validity for estimating time spent sitting and standing at work and is comparable to existing occupational physical activity measures for assessing time spent walking at work. The OSPAQ brief instrument measures sitting and standing at work as distinct behaviors and would be especially suitable in national health surveys, prospective cohort studies, and other studies that are limited by space constraints for questionnaire items.

Cross-sectional associations between occupational and leisure-time sitting, physical activity and obesity in working adults

AIM

To examine associations between occupational and leisure-time sitting, physical activity and obesity in working adults.

METHODS

We analyzed data from workers from the 2007-08 Australian National Health Survey (n=10,785). Participants reported their activity at work (mostly sitting, standing, walking, or heavy labor), transport-related walking, leisure-time sitting and physical activity. Body mass index was objectively measured. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression models examined associations between occupational activity category, leisure-time sitting, physical activity and obesity risk.

RESULTS

Substantial proportions of men (42%) and women (47%) mostly sit at work. Workers with sitting jobs were significantly more likely to be sufficiently active during leisure-time than workers with mostly standing, walking or heavy labor jobs (RR=0.88, 0.80, 0.86 respectively). Workers with mostly sitting jobs had significantly higher overweight/obesity risk than workers with mostly standing jobs (RR=0.88, 95% CI: 0.82-0.95) independent of physical activity and leisure-time sitting. Workers with leisure-time sitting of less than four hours per day had significantly lower obesity risk than workers with four or more hours per day of leisure-time sitting (RR=0.77, 95%CI: 0.69-0.87) independent of physical activity and occupational activity.

CONCLUSIONS

Sitting time and physical activity are independently associated with obesity. Leisure-time sitting may have a stronger association with obesity risk than occupational sitting.

A tool for measuring workers' sitting time by domain: the Workforce Sitting Questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Sitting time is an emerging health risk, and many working adults spend large amounts of time sitting each day. It is important to have reliable and accurate measurement tools to assess sitting time in different contexts.

OBJECTIVE

To validate the Workforce Sitting Questionnaire (WSQ), an adapted measure of total and domain-specific sitting time based on work and non-workdays for use in working adults.

METHODS

A convenience sample (N=95, 63.2% women) was recruited from two workplaces and by word-of-mouth in Sydney, Australia. Participants completed the WSQ, which asked about sitting time (1) while travelling to and from places; (2) while at work; (3) while watching TV; (4) while using a computer at home; and (5) while doing other leisure activities on work and non-workdays on two occasions, 7 days apart. Participants also wore an accelerometer for the 7 days between test and retest. They recorded the times they wore the accelerometer, the days they worked and their work times in a logbook. Analyses determined test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and assessed criterion validity against accelerometers using Spearman's r and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

Measuring total sitting time based on a workday, non-workday and on average had fair to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC=0.46-0.90) and had sufficient criterion validity against accelerometry in women (r=0.22-0.46) and men (r=0.18-0.29). Measuring domain-specific sitting at work on a workday was also reliable (ICC=0.63) and valid (r=0.45).

CONCLUSIONS

The WSQ has acceptable measurement properties for measuring sitting time at work on a workday and for assessing total sitting time based on work and non-workdays. This questionnaire would be suitable for use in research investigating the relationships between sitting time and health in working populations.

Advances in population surveillance for physical activity and sedentary behavior: reliability and validity of time use surveys

Many countries conduct regular national time use surveys, some of which date back as far as the 1960s. Time use surveys potentially provide more detailed and accurate national estimates of the prevalence of sedentary and physical activity behavior than more traditional self-report surveillance systems. In this study, the authors determined the reliability and validity of time use surveys for assessing sedentary and physical activity behavior. In 2006 and 2007, participants (n = 134) were recruited from work sites in the Australian state of New South Wales. Participants completed a 2-day time use diary twice, 7 days apart, and wore an accelerometer. The 2 diaries were compared for test-retest reliability, and comparison with the accelerometer determined concurrent validity. Participants with similar activity patterns during the 2 diary periods showed reliability intraclass correlations of 0.74 and 0.73 for nonoccupational sedentary behavior and moderate/vigorous physical activity, respectively. Comparison of the diary with the accelerometer showed Spearman correlations of 0.57-0.59 and 0.45-0.69 for nonoccupational sedentary behavior and moderate/vigorous physical activity, respectively. Time use surveys appear to be more valid for population surveillance of nonoccupational sedentary behavior and health-enhancing physical activity than more traditional surveillance systems. National time use surveys could be used to retrospectively study nonoccupational sedentary and physical activity behavior over the past 5 decades.

Are workplace interventions to reduce sitting effective? A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review the effectiveness of workplace interventions for reducing sitting.

METHODS

Studies published up to April 2009 were identified by literature searches in multiple databases. Studies were included if they were interventions to increase energy expenditure (increase physical activity or decrease sitting); were conducted in a workplace setting; and specifically measured sitting as a primary or secondary outcome. Two independent reviewers assessed methodological quality of the included studies, and data on study design, sample, measures of sitting, intervention and results were extracted.

RESULTS

Six studies met the inclusion criteria (five randomised trials and one pre-post study). The primary aim of all six was to increase physical activity; all had reducing sitting as a secondary aim. All used self-report measures of sitting; one specifically assessed occupational sitting time; the others used measures of general sitting. No studies showed that sitting decreased significantly in the intervention group, compared with a control or comparison group.

CONCLUSION

Currently, there is a dearth of evidence on the effectiveness of workplace interventions for reducing sitting. In light of the growing body of evidence that prolonged sitting is negatively associated with health, this highlights a gap in the scientific literature that needs to be addressed.