Kate B Prendergast1, Lisa M Mackay2, Grant M Schofield2. 1. Human Potential Centre, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand. kate.prendergast@aut.ac.nz. 2. Human Potential Centre, Auckland University of Technology, Private Bag 92006, Auckland, 1142, New Zealand.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was to determine (1) associations between multiple lifestyle behaviours and optimal wellbeing and (2) the extent to which five lifestyle behaviours-sleep, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sugary drink consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake-cluster in a national sample. METHOD: A national sample of New Zealand adults participated in a web-based wellbeing survey. Five lifestyle behaviours-sleep, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sugary drink consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake-were dichotomised into healthy (meets recommendations) and unhealthy (does not meet recommendations) categories. Optimal wellbeing was calculated using a multi-dimensional flourishing scale, and binary logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the relationship between multiple healthy behaviours and optimal wellbeing. Clustering was examined by comparing the observed and expected prevalence rates (O/E) of healthy and unhealthy two-, three-, four-, and five-behaviour combinations. RESULTS: Data from 9425 participants show those engaging in four to five healthy behaviours (23 %) were 4.7 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.8-5.7) times more likely to achieve optimal wellbeing compared to those engaging in zero to one healthy behaviour (21 %). Clustering was observed for healthy (5 %, O/E 2.0, 95 % CI 1.8-2.2) and unhealthy (5 %, O/E 2.1, 95 % CI 1.9-2.3) five-behaviour combinations and for four- and three-behaviour combinations. At the two-behaviour level, healthy fruit and vegetable intake clustered with all behaviours, except sleep which did not cluster with any behaviour. CONCLUSION: Multiple lifestyle behaviours were positively associated with optimal wellbeing. The results show lifestyle behaviours cluster, providing support for multiple behaviour lifestyle-based interventions for optimising wellbeing.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was to determine (1) associations between multiple lifestyle behaviours and optimal wellbeing and (2) the extent to which five lifestyle behaviours-sleep, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sugary drink consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake-cluster in a national sample. METHOD: A national sample of New Zealand adults participated in a web-based wellbeing survey. Five lifestyle behaviours-sleep, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, sugary drink consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake-were dichotomised into healthy (meets recommendations) and unhealthy (does not meet recommendations) categories. Optimal wellbeing was calculated using a multi-dimensional flourishing scale, and binary logistic regression analysis was used to calculate the relationship between multiple healthy behaviours and optimal wellbeing. Clustering was examined by comparing the observed and expected prevalence rates (O/E) of healthy and unhealthy two-, three-, four-, and five-behaviour combinations. RESULTS: Data from 9425 participants show those engaging in four to five healthy behaviours (23 %) were 4.7 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.8-5.7) times more likely to achieve optimal wellbeing compared to those engaging in zero to one healthy behaviour (21 %). Clustering was observed for healthy (5 %, O/E 2.0, 95 % CI 1.8-2.2) and unhealthy (5 %, O/E 2.1, 95 % CI 1.9-2.3) five-behaviour combinations and for four- and three-behaviour combinations. At the two-behaviour level, healthy fruit and vegetable intake clustered with all behaviours, except sleep which did not cluster with any behaviour. CONCLUSION: Multiple lifestyle behaviours were positively associated with optimal wellbeing. The results show lifestyle behaviours cluster, providing support for multiple behaviour lifestyle-based interventions for optimising wellbeing.
Authors: Nicolaas P Pronk; Louise H Anderson; A Lauren Crain; Brian C Martinson; Patrick J O'Connor; Nancy E Sherwood; Robin R Whitebird Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Liliana S Araújo; David Wasley; Rosie Perkins; Louise Atkins; Emma Redding; Jane Ginsborg; Aaron Williamon Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2017-10-10
Authors: Ernesta Sofija; Neil Harris; Dung Phung; Adem Sav; Bernadette Sebar Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-17 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mitch J Duncan; Wendy J Brown; Tracy L Burrows; Clare E Collins; Sasha Fenton; Nicholas Glozier; Gregory S Kolt; Philip J Morgan; Michael Hensley; Elizabeth G Holliday; Beatrice Murawski; Ronald C Plotnikoff; Anna T Rayward; Emmanuel Stamatakis; Corneel Vandelanotte Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-10-30 Impact factor: 2.692