Clare Hume1, David Dunstan1,2,3, Jo Salmon2, Genevieve Healy4, Nick Andrianopoulos1, Neville Owen2,4. 1. The Centre for Physical Activity and Nutrition Research, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia (Dr Hume, Associate Professor Dunstan, Professor Salmon, Dr Andrianopoulos) 2. The Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia (Associate Professor Dunstan, Professor Salmon, Professor Owen) 3. The Vario Health Institute, Edith Cowan University, Perth Australia (Associate Professor Dunstan) 4. The University of Queensland, School of Population Health, Cancer Prevention Research Centre, Brisbane, Australia (Associate Professor Dunstan, Dr Healy, Professor Owen)
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine perceived barriers to physical activity among adults with and without abnormal glucose metabolism (AGM), and whether barriers varied according to physical activity status. METHODS: The 1999 to 2000 Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab) was a population-based cross-sectional study among adults aged > or =25 years. AGM was identified through an oral glucose tolerance test. The previous week's physical activity and individual, social, and environmental barriers to physical activity were self-reported. Logistic regression analyses examined differences in barriers to physical activity between those with and without AGM, and for those with and without AGM who did and did not meet the minimum recommendation of 150 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity. RESULTS: Of the 7088 participants (47.5 +/- 12.7 years; 46% male), 18.5% had AGM. Approximately 47.5% of those with AGM met the physical activity recommendation, compared to 54.7% of those without AGM (P < .001). Key barriers to physical activity included lack of time, other priorities, and being tired. Following adjustment for sociodemographic and behavioral factors, there were few differences in barriers to physical activity between those with and without AGM, even after stratifying according to physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with AGM report similar barriers to physical activity, as do those without AGM. Programs for those with AGM can therefore focus on the known generic adult-reported barriers to physical activity.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine perceived barriers to physical activity among adults with and without abnormal glucose metabolism (AGM), and whether barriers varied according to physical activity status. METHODS: The 1999 to 2000 Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab) was a population-based cross-sectional study among adults aged > or =25 years. AGM was identified through an oral glucose tolerance test. The previous week's physical activity and individual, social, and environmental barriers to physical activity were self-reported. Logistic regression analyses examined differences in barriers to physical activity between those with and without AGM, and for those with and without AGM who did and did not meet the minimum recommendation of 150 minutes/week of moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity. RESULTS: Of the 7088 participants (47.5 +/- 12.7 years; 46% male), 18.5% had AGM. Approximately 47.5% of those with AGM met the physical activity recommendation, compared to 54.7% of those without AGM (P < .001). Key barriers to physical activity included lack of time, other priorities, and being tired. Following adjustment for sociodemographic and behavioral factors, there were few differences in barriers to physical activity between those with and without AGM, even after stratifying according to physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with AGM report similar barriers to physical activity, as do those without AGM. Programs for those with AGM can therefore focus on the known generic adult-reported barriers to physical activity.
Authors: Cynthia Fritschi; Laurie Quinn; Eileen D Hacker; Sue M Penckofer; Edward Wang; Marquis Foreman; Carol E Ferrans Journal: Diabetes Educ Date: 2012-06-19 Impact factor: 2.140
Authors: Megan Teychenne; Kylie Ball; Jo Salmon; Robin M Daly; David A Crawford; Parneet Sethi; Michelle Jorna; David W Dunstan Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2015-08-25 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Thamra Alghafri; Saud M Alharthi; Yahya Mohd Al Farsi; Elaine Bannerman; Angela Mary Craigie; Annie S Anderson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-11-03 Impact factor: 2.692