posted on 2019-08-29, 13:35authored byC Edwardson, J Henson, SJH Biddle, M Davies, K Khunti, B Maylor, T Yates
Purpose: To establish whether associations between sedentary behaviour and
cardiometabolic health differ when assessed by thigh-worn and waist-worn accelerometry.
Methods: Participants were recruited from several areas in the United Kingdom. Sedentary
behaviour was assessed using the activPAL worn on the thigh and ActiGraph worn on the
waist. Average total (TST), prolonged (bouts ≥30minutes; PST) and breaks (BST) in
sedentary time were calculated. Cardiometabolic health markers included: adiposity (body
fat) and surrogate markers of adiposity ((waist circumference, body mass index (BMI)), lipids
(total, low density lipoprotein (LDL) and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol,
triglycerides), blood pressure and glucose (fasting, 2 h and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)).
A clustered cardiometabolic risk score was calculated. Linear regression analysis examined
the associations with cardiometabolic health.
Results: 1457 participants (mean age (± standard deviation): 59.38 ± 11.85 years; 51.7%
male; mean BMI: 30.19 ± 5.59 kg/m2 14 ) were included in the analyses. ActivPAL and
ActiGraph sedentary variables were moderately correlated (0.416 - 0.511, p<0.01), however
all variables were significantly different from each other (p<0.05). Consistency was observed
across devices in the direction and magnitude of associations of TST and PST with adiposity,
surrogate markers of adiposity, HDL, triglycerides and cardiometabolic risk score and for
BST with adiposity, surrogate markers of adiposity and cardiometabolic risk. Differences
across devices were observed in associations of TST and PST with diastolic blood pressure,
for TST with 2 h glucose and for BST with HDL. No other associations were observed for
any other health marker for either device.
Conclusion: Results suggest that associations with cardiometabolic health are largely
comparable across the two common assessments of sedentary behaviour but some small
differences may exist for certain health markers.
Funding
The analysis was supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Leicester
Biomedical Research Centre which is a partnership between University Hospitals of Leicester
NHS Trust, Loughborough University and the University of Leicester, and the National
Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and
319 Care–East Midlands (NIHR CLAHRC–EM). The STAND study was funded by a grant from
the Medical Research Council (UK) under the National Prevention Research Initiative
(Project #91409).The Walking Away from Diabetes study was funded by the National
Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration in Applied Health Research and Care for
Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Rutland (CLAHRC LNR) and the Collaboration for
Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care – East Midlands (CLAHRC – EM). The
PROPELS trial was funded by the Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme,
National Institute for Health research.
History
Citation
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise: February 2020 - Volume 52 - Issue 2 - p 391-397
doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002138
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Diabetes Research Centre
Version
AM (Accepted Manuscript)
Published in
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise
Volume
52
Issue
2
Pagination
391-397
Publisher
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM)
The file associated with this record is under embargo until 12 months after publication, in accordance with the publisher's self-archiving policy. The full text may be available through the publisher links provided above.