Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Physiology, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; TiFN, P.O. Box 557, 6700 AN Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Physiology, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands; Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Prev Med. 2021 Dec;153:106731. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2021.106731. Epub 2021 Jul 17.
Studies which examined the association between sedentary behavior (SB) and cognitive function have presented equivocal findings. Mentally active/inactive sedentary domains may relate differently to cognitive function. We examined associations between SB and cognitive function, specifically focusing on different domains. Participants were recruited from the Nijmegen Exercise Study 2018 in the Netherlands. SB (h/day) was measured with the Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire. Cognitive function was assessed with a validated computer self-test (COST-A), and a z-score calculated for global cognitive function. Multivariate linear regression assessed associations between tertiles of sedentary time and cognitive function. Cognition tests were available from 2821 participants, complete data from 2237 participants (43% female), with a median age of 61 [IQR 52-67] and a mean sedentary time of 8.3 ± 3.2 h/day. In fully adjusted models, cognitive function was significantly better in participants with the highest total sedentary time (0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.12], P = 0.01), work-related sedentary time (0.13 [95% CI 0.07-0.19], P < 0.001), and non-occupational computer time (0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.12], P = 0.01), compared to the least sedentary. Leisure sedentary time and time spent sedentary in the domains TV, reading or creative time showed no association with cognitive function in final models (all P > 0.05). We found a strong, independent positive association between total SB and cognitive function in a heterogenous population. This relation was not consistent across different domains, with especially work- and computer-related SB being positively associated with cognitive function. This highlights the importance of assessing the various sedentary domains in understanding the relation between sedentary time and cognitive function.
研究表明，久坐行为（SB）与认知功能之间存在关联，但研究结果并不一致。精神活跃/不活跃的久坐领域可能与认知功能的关系不同。我们研究了 SB 与认知功能之间的关系，特别是关注不同领域。参与者是从荷兰奈梅亨 2018 年锻炼研究中招募的。使用久坐行为问卷测量 SB（小时/天）。使用经过验证的计算机自我测试（COST-A）评估认知功能，并计算出总体认知功能的 z 分数。多元线性回归分析了久坐时间三分位与认知功能之间的关联。共有 2821 名参与者完成了认知测试，2237 名参与者（43%为女性）完成了完整数据，中位年龄为 61 [IQR 52-67]，平均久坐时间为 8.3±3.2 小时/天。在完全调整的模型中，久坐时间最长的参与者的认知功能明显更好（0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.12]，P=0.01），与工作相关的久坐时间（0.13 [95% CI 0.07-0.19]，P<0.001）和非职业性计算机时间（0.07 [95% CI 0.02-0.12]，P=0.01）相比，与最少久坐的参与者相比。在最终模型中，休闲久坐时间和在电视、阅读或创意时间等领域的久坐时间与认知功能没有关联（所有 P>0.05）。在异质人群中，我们发现总 SB 与认知功能之间存在强烈的、独立的正相关关系。这种关系在不同领域并不一致，尤其是与工作和计算机相关的 SB 与认知功能呈正相关。这突出了评估各种久坐领域在理解久坐时间与认知功能之间关系的重要性。
