Fountaine Charles J, Johann Josh, Skalko Craig, Liguori Gary A
Department of Applied Human Sciences, University of Minnesota Duluth, Duluth, Minnesota.
Department of Health and Human Performance, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Chattanooga, TN.
Int J Exerc Sci. 2016 Apr 1;9(2):223-229. doi: 10.70252/WHAR7442. eCollection 2016.
The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in metabolic and energy cost (MEC) of college students while seated, standing, and during a sitting/stepping protocol. Participants were assessed via indirect calorimetry for 20 min in each of the following conditions: 1) seated in a standard office chair, 2) standing in place, and 3) a sitting/stepping protocol in which participants performed 1 min of stepping in place at 90 bpm, sat for 9 min, then repeated the stepping and sitting sequence once more. Participants completed each of the 3 trials in the aforementioned order, preceded with a 3 min acclimation period in each condition. A significant difference in MEC was observed between the 3 conditions, < 0.001. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the sitting/stepping protocol resulted in significantly greater MEC than the seated and standing conditions ( < 0.001). Additionally, the standing protocol resulted in significantly greater MEC than the seated protocol ( < 0.001). The significant differences and large effect sizes between conditions indicate that interspersing sedentary bouts with brief activity can substantially increase MEC. Broader application of these findings may provide health promotion professionals with novel strategies to reduce sedentary behavior and improve health.
本研究的目的是比较大学生在坐着、站立以及坐/踏步方案期间的代谢和能量消耗(MEC)差异。通过间接测热法对参与者在以下每种条件下进行20分钟的评估:1)坐在标准办公椅上;2)原地站立;3)坐/踏步方案,即参与者以每分钟90次的节奏原地踏步1分钟,然后静坐9分钟,接着再次重复踏步和静坐序列。参与者按照上述顺序完成3次试验,每种条件下均先有3分钟的适应期。在这三种条件下观察到MEC存在显著差异,P<0.001。两两比较表明,坐/踏步方案导致的MEC显著高于坐着和站立条件(P<0.001)。此外,站立方案导致的MEC显著高于坐着方案(P<0.001)。不同条件之间的显著差异和较大效应量表明,在久坐期间穿插短暂活动可大幅增加MEC。这些研究结果的更广泛应用可能为健康促进专业人员提供减少久坐行为和改善健康的新策略。