Fan Jingwen, Zhang Xuesong, Jia Xiaocan, Fan Zhixing, Yang Chaojun, Wang Yuping, Zhao Chenyu, Wang Nana, Shi Xuezhong, Yang Yongli
College of Public Health, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
The First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University and Yichang Central People's Hospital, Yichang, China.
Transl Psychiatry. 2025 Feb 1;15(1):39. doi: 10.1038/s41398-024-03219-w.
Evidence is limited on the incidence of depression and anxiety in relation to active commuting. Our study aimed to explore their association and examine the mediating role of inflammatory. This study included 240,547 workers in the UK Biobank. The exposure variable was the mode of transport used to get to and from work including active (walking, cycling, mixed mode) and non-active commuting (car or public transport). The incidence of depression and anxiety was defined using ICD-10 codes. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to explore the hazard ratios (HRs) of active commuting with depression and anxiety, and mediation analyses were used to test the mediating role of inflammatory in this association. There were 10,862 depression and 9407 anxiety events. Active commuting was associated with lower risk of depression [cycling: HR 0.775, 95% confidence interval (0.674-0.890); mixed mode walking: 0.858 (0.800-0.919); mixed mode cycling: 0.821 (0.744-0.907)] and anxiety [cycling: 0.781 (0.675-0.904); mixed mode walking: 0.867 (0.805-0.934); mixed mode cycling 0.810 (0.728-0.902)], and there were distinct dose-response trends between commuting distance and incidence of depression or anxiety. Inflammatory explained 19.75% of the association between cycling with depression, and 18.05% with anxiety. There were interactions between commuting and occupation type. Cycle and mix mode commuting were associated with lower risk of depression and anxiety, and inflammation partially mediated these association. Implementing initiatives that facilitate active commuting may help alleviate the poor mental health.
关于与积极通勤相关的抑郁和焦虑发生率的证据有限。我们的研究旨在探讨它们之间的关联，并检验炎症的中介作用。本研究纳入了英国生物银行的240,547名工作人员。暴露变量是上下班使用的交通方式，包括积极通勤（步行、骑自行车、混合模式）和非积极通勤（汽车或公共交通）。抑郁和焦虑的发生率使用国际疾病分类第10版（ICD - 10）编码来定义。采用Cox比例风险回归模型探讨积极通勤与抑郁和焦虑的风险比（HRs），并进行中介分析以检验炎症在这种关联中的中介作用。共有10,862例抑郁事件和9407例焦虑事件。积极通勤与较低的抑郁风险相关[骑自行车：HR 0.775，95%置信区间（0.674 - 0.890）；步行混合模式：0.858（0.800 - 0.919）；骑自行车混合模式：0.821（0.744 - 0.907）]和焦虑风险[骑自行车：0.781（0.675 - 0.904）；步行混合模式：0.867（0.805 - 0.934）；骑自行车混合模式0.810（0.728 - 0.902）]，并且通勤距离与抑郁或焦虑发生率之间存在明显的剂量反应趋势。炎症解释了骑自行车与抑郁之间关联的19.75%，与焦虑之间关联的18.05%。通勤与职业类型之间存在相互作用。骑自行车和混合模式通勤与较低的抑郁和焦虑风险相关，并炎症部分介导了这些关联。实施促进积极通勤的举措可能有助于缓解不良心理健康状况。
