Suppr超能文献

体育活动是否能减弱甚至消除久坐时间与死亡率之间的有害关联?一项针对超过 100 万男性和女性数据的综合荟萃分析。

Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women.

机构信息

Department of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway; Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Department of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway.

出版信息

Lancet. 2016 Sep 24;388(10051):1302-10. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30370-1. Epub 2016 Jul 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

High amounts of sedentary behaviour have been associated with increased risks of several chronic conditions and mortality. However, it is unclear whether physical activity attenuates or even eliminates the detrimental effects of prolonged sitting. We examined the associations of sedentary behaviour and physical activity with all-cause mortality.

METHODS

We did a systematic review, searching six databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, Sport Discus, and Scopus) from database inception until October, 2015, for prospective cohort studies that had individual level exposure and outcome data, provided data on both daily sitting or TV-viewing time and physical activity, and reported effect estimates for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease mortality, or breast, colon, and colorectal cancer mortality. We included data from 16 studies, of which 14 were identified through a systematic review and two were additional unpublished studies where pertinent data were available. All study data were analysed according to a harmonised protocol, which categorised reported daily sitting time and TV-viewing time into four standardised groups each, and physical activity into quartiles (in metabolic equivalent of task [MET]-hours per week). We then combined data across all studies to analyse the association of daily sitting time and physical activity with all-cause mortality, and estimated summary hazard ratios using Cox regression. We repeated these analyses using TV-viewing time instead of daily sitting time.

FINDINGS

Of the 16 studies included in the meta-analysis, 13 studies provided data on sitting time and all-cause mortality. These studies included 1 005 791 individuals who were followed up for 2-18·1 years, during which 84 609 (8·4%) died. Compared with the referent group (ie, those sitting <4 h/day and in the most active quartile [>35·5 MET-h per week]), mortality rates during follow-up were 12-59% higher in the two lowest quartiles of physical activity (from HR=1·12, 95% CI 1·08-1·16, for the second lowest quartile of physical activity [<16 MET-h per week] and sitting <4 h/day; to HR=1·59, 1·52-1·66, for the lowest quartile of physical activity [<2·5 MET-h per week] and sitting >8 h/day). Daily sitting time was not associated with increased all-cause mortality in those in the most active quartile of physical activity. Compared with the referent (<4 h of sitting per day and highest quartile of physical activity [>35·5 MET-h per week]), there was no increased risk of mortality during follow-up in those who sat for more than 8 h/day but who also reported >35·5 MET-h per week of activity (HR=1·04; 95% CI 0·99-1·10). By contrast, those who sat the least (<4 h/day) and were in the lowest activity quartile (<2·5 MET-h per week) had a significantly increased risk of dying during follow-up (HR=1·27, 95% CI 1·22-1·31). Six studies had data on TV-viewing time (N=465 450; 43 740 deaths). Watching TV for 3 h or more per day was associated with increased mortality regardless of physical activity, except in the most active quartile, where mortality was significantly increased only in people who watched TV for 5 h/day or more (HR=1·16, 1·05-1·28).

INTERPRETATION

High levels of moderate intensity physical activity (ie, about 60-75 min per day) seem to eliminate the increased risk of death associated with high sitting time. However, this high activity level attenuates, but does not eliminate the increased risk associated with high TV-viewing time. These results provide further evidence on the benefits of physical activity, particularly in societies where increasing numbers of people have to sit for long hours for work and may also inform future public health recommendations.

FUNDING

None.

摘要

背景

大量久坐行为与多种慢性疾病和死亡率的增加有关。然而,目前尚不清楚体力活动是否能减弱甚至消除长时间坐着的不利影响。我们研究了久坐行为和体力活动与全因死亡率之间的关系。

方法

我们进行了一项系统综述,从数据库建立之初到 2015 年 10 月,在六个数据库(PubMed、PsycINFO、Embase、Web of Science、Sport Discus 和 Scopus)中进行了搜索,寻找有个体水平暴露和结局数据的前瞻性队列研究,这些研究提供了关于每天久坐或看电视时间和体力活动的数据,并报告了全因死亡率、心血管疾病死亡率或乳腺癌、结肠癌和结直肠癌死亡率的效应估计值。我们纳入了 16 项研究的数据,其中 14 项是通过系统综述确定的,另外两项是可获得相关数据的未发表研究。所有研究数据均根据一项协调一致的方案进行分析,该方案将报告的每天久坐时间和看电视时间分为四个标准化组,将体力活动分为四分位(代谢当量[MET]-小时/周)。然后,我们将所有研究的数据合并起来,分析每天久坐时间和体力活动与全因死亡率的关系,并使用 Cox 回归估计综合危险比。我们使用看电视时间代替每天久坐时间重复了这些分析。

发现

在荟萃分析中纳入的 16 项研究中,有 13 项研究提供了久坐时间和全因死亡率的数据。这些研究包括 1005791 名参与者,随访时间为 2-18.1 年,在此期间,有 84609 人(8.4%)死亡。与参考组(即每天坐<4 小时且处于最活跃四分位(>35.5 MET-h/周))相比,在随访期间,死亡率在两个体力活动最低四分位(最低体力活动四分位[<16 MET-h/周]和每天坐>8 小时)的参与者中高 12-59%(HR=1.12,95%CI 1.08-1.16),而在最高体力活动四分位(>35.5 MET-h/周)和每天坐<4 小时的参与者中,死亡率则没有增加(HR=1.59,1.52-1.66)。在体力活动最高四分位的参与者中,每天久坐时间与全因死亡率增加无关。与参考组(<4 小时/天和最高体力活动四分位(>35.5 MET-h/周))相比,在每天坐>8 小时但报告的活动量>35.5 MET-h/周的参与者中,随访期间没有增加死亡的风险(HR=1.04;95%CI 0.99-1.10)。相比之下,每天坐的最少(<4 小时/天)且处于体力活动最低四分位(<2.5 MET-h/周)的参与者在随访期间死亡的风险显著增加(HR=1.27,95%CI 1.22-1.31)。有 6 项研究提供了看电视时间的数据(N=465450;43740 人死亡)。每天看电视 3 小时或以上与死亡风险增加有关,无论体力活动如何,除了在最活跃的四分位,只有每天看电视 5 小时或以上的人死亡风险显著增加(HR=1.16,1.05-1.28)。

结论

中高强度体力活动(即每天约 60-75 分钟)水平似乎可以消除与长时间坐着相关的死亡风险增加。然而,这种高活动水平虽然能减弱,但并不能消除与长时间看电视相关的死亡风险增加。这些结果进一步证明了体力活动的益处,特别是在越来越多的人因工作需要长时间坐着的社会中,这也为未来的公共卫生建议提供了信息。

资助

无。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验