Dori E Rosenberg1, John Bellettiere2, Paul A Gardiner3, Veronica N Villarreal4, Katie Crist4, Jacqueline Kerr4. 1. Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington. rosenberg.d@ghc.org. 2. San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in Public Health (Epidemiology), San Diego State University and the University of California. 3. School of Population Health and Translation Research Into Practice Center, Mater Research Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 4. Department of Family & Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examined the relationships between objective and self-reported sedentary time and health indicators among older adults residing in retirement communities. METHODS: Our cross-sectional analysis used data from 307 participants who completed baseline measurements of a physical activity trial in 11 retirement communities in San Diego County. Sedentary time was objectively measured with devices (accelerometers) and using self-reports. Outcomes assessed included emotional and cognitive health, physical function, and physical health (eg, blood pressure). Linear mixed-effects models examined associations between sedentary behavior and outcomes adjusting for demographics and accelerometer physical activity. RESULTS: Higher device-measured sedentary time was associated with worse objective physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery, balance task scores, 400-m walk time, chair stand time, gait speed), self-reported physical function, and fear of falling but with less sleep disturbance (all ps < .05). TV viewing was positively related to 400-m walk time (p < .05). Self-reported sedentary behavior was related to better performance on one cognitive task (trails A; p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Sedentary time was mostly related to poorer physical function independently of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and may be a modifiable behavior target in interventions aiming to improve physical function in older adults. Few associations were observed with self-reported sedentary behavior measures.
BACKGROUND: We examined the relationships between objective and self-reported sedentary time and health indicators among older adults residing in retirement communities. METHODS: Our cross-sectional analysis used data from 307 participants who completed baseline measurements of a physical activity trial in 11 retirement communities in San Diego County. Sedentary time was objectively measured with devices (accelerometers) and using self-reports. Outcomes assessed included emotional and cognitive health, physical function, and physical health (eg, blood pressure). Linear mixed-effects models examined associations between sedentary behavior and outcomes adjusting for demographics and accelerometer physical activity. RESULTS: Higher device-measured sedentary time was associated with worse objective physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery, balance task scores, 400-m walk time, chair stand time, gait speed), self-reported physical function, and fear of falling but with less sleep disturbance (all ps < .05). TV viewing was positively related to 400-m walk time (p < .05). Self-reported sedentary behavior was related to better performance on one cognitive task (trails A; p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Sedentary time was mostly related to poorer physical function independently of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and may be a modifiable behavior target in interventions aiming to improve physical function in older adults. Few associations were observed with self-reported sedentary behavior measures.
Authors: Jacqueline Kerr; Dori E Rosenberg; Andrea Nathan; Rachel A Millstein; Jordan A Carlson; Katie Crist; Kari Wasilenko; Khalisa Bolling; Cynthia M Castro; David M Buchner; Simon J Marshall Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2012-08-17 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Stephanie M George; Catherine M Alfano; Jay Groves; Zafer Karabulut; Kirsten L Haman; Barbara A Murphy; Charles E Matthews Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-02-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Leandro Fornias Machado de Rezende; Juan Pablo Rey-López; Victor Keihan Rodrigues Matsudo; Olinda do Carmo Luiz Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-04-09 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Cesar Eduardo Jacintho Moritz; Bruno Costa Teixeira; Liliana Rockenbach; Alvaro Reischak-Oliveira; Emerson André Casali; Ana Maria Oliveira Battastini Journal: Mol Cell Biochem Date: 2016-11-16 Impact factor: 3.396
Authors: L Sagarra-Romero; G Vicente-Rodríguez; R Pedrero-Chamizo; S Vila-Maldonado; N Gusi; J G Villa-Vicente; L Espino; M González-Gross; J A Casajús; I Ara; A Gómez-Cabello Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Sheri J Hartman; Catherine R Marinac; John Bellettiere; Suneeta Godbole; Loki Natarajan; Ruth E Patterson; Jacqueline Kerr Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Eileen Rillamas-Sun; Michael J LaMonte; Kelly R Evenson; Cynthia A Thomson; Shirley A Beresford; Mathilda C Coday; Todd M Manini; Wenjun Li; Andrea Z LaCroix Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2018-10-08 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Zvinka Z Zlatar; Chelsea C Hays; Zoe Mestre; Laura M Campbell; M J Meloy; Katherine J Bangen; Thomas T Liu; Jacqueline Kerr; Christina E Wierenga Journal: Exp Gerontol Date: 2019-08-02 Impact factor: 4.032
Authors: N Reid; G N Healy; J Gianoudis; M Formica; P A Gardiner; E E Eakin; C A Nowson; R M Daly Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2018-02-26 Impact factor: 4.507