Institute for Resilient Regions, University of Southern Queensland, Education City, Springfield Central, QLD, AUSTRALIA.
Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UNITED KINGDOM.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2020 Feb;52(2):391-397. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000002138.
To establish whether associations between sedentary behavior and cardiometabolic health differ when assessed by thigh-worn and waist-worn accelerometry.
Participants were recruited from several areas in the United Kingdom. Sedentary behavior was assessed using the activPAL worn on the thigh and ActiGraph worn on the waist. Average total (TST), prolonged (bouts ≥30 min; 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, and high-density lipoprotein [HDL] cholesterol, triglycerides), blood pressure, and glucose (fasting, 2 h and glycated hemoglobin A1c). A clustered cardiometabolic risk score was calculated. Linear regression analysis examined the associations with cardiometabolic health.
There were 1457 participants (mean age [± standard deviation], 59.38 ± 11.85 yr; 51.7% male; mean BMI, 30.19 ± 5.59 kg·m) 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.
Results suggest that associations with cardiometabolic health are largely comparable across the two common assessments of sedentary behavior but some small differences may exist for certain health markers.
确定使用大腿佩戴和腰部佩戴加速度计评估时，久坐行为与心脏代谢健康之间的关联是否存在差异。
参与者是从英国的几个地区招募的。使用大腿上佩戴的 activPAL 和腰部佩戴的 ActiGraph 评估久坐行为。计算平均总时间（TST）、长时间（持续时间≥30 分钟；PST）和久坐时间的休息（BST）。心脏代谢健康标志物包括：肥胖（体脂肪）和肥胖的替代标志物（腰围、体重指数[BMI]）、脂质（总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白和高密度脂蛋白[HDL]胆固醇、甘油三酯）、血压和血糖（空腹、2 小时和糖化血红蛋白 A1c）。计算了聚类心脏代谢风险评分。线性回归分析检查了与心脏代谢健康的关联。
共纳入 1457 名参与者（平均年龄[±标准差]，59.38±11.85 岁；51.7%为男性；平均 BMI，30.19±5.59kg·m）。ActivPAL 和 ActiGraph 久坐变量中度相关（0.416-0.511，P<0.01）；然而，所有变量彼此之间均有显著差异（P<0.05）。两种设备的 TST 和 PST 与肥胖、肥胖替代标志物、HDL、甘油三酯和心脏代谢风险评分的相关性以及 BST 与肥胖、肥胖替代标志物和心脏代谢风险的相关性在方向和幅度上均一致。在 TST 和 PST 与舒张压、TST 与 2 小时血糖和 BST 与 HDL 之间，两种设备的关联存在差异。对于任何其他健康标志物，两种设备均未观察到其他关联。
结果表明，与心脏代谢健康的关联在两种常见的久坐行为评估中基本相似，但对于某些健康标志物可能存在一些微小差异。
