Jennifer L Reed1, Stephanie A Prince2, Cara G Elliott2, Kerri-Anne Mullen2, Heather E Tulloch2, Swapnil Hiremath2, Lisa M Cotie2, Andrew L Pipe2, Robert D Reid2. 1. From the Division of Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ontario, Canada (J.L.R., S.A.P., C.G.E., K.-A.M., H.E.T., L.M.C., A.L.P., R.D.R.); and Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ontario, Canada (S.H.). jreed@ottawaheart.ca. 2. From the Division of Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, Ontario, Canada (J.L.R., S.A.P., C.G.E., K.-A.M., H.E.T., L.M.C., A.L.P., R.D.R.); and Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ontario, Canada (S.H.).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among women in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Physical activity is protective for cardiovascular disease. The realities of modern life require working-age women to address work-related, family, and social demands. Few working-age women meet current moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA) recommendations. Given that working-age women spend a substantial proportion of their waking hours at work, places of employment may be an opportune and a controlled setting to implement programs, improving MVPA levels and enhancing cardiometabolic health. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eight electronic databases were searched to identify all prospective cohort and experimental studies reporting an MVPA outcome of workplace interventions for working-age women (mean age, 18-65 years) in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool; quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A qualitative synthesis was performed for all studies, and meta-analyses were conducted where possible. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria; 20 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Workplace interventions significantly increased minutes per week of metabolic equivalents (4 studies; standardized mean differences, 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44 to 2.69), but not minutes per week of MVPA (13 studies; standardized mean differences, 0.38; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.92) or metabolic equivalents per week (3 studies; standardized mean differences, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.48 to 0.71). Workplace interventions also significantly decreased body mass (7 studies; mean differences, -0.83 kg; 95% CI, -1.64 to -0.02), body mass index (6 studies; mean differences, -0.35 kg/m2; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.07), low-density lipoprotein (4 studies; mean differences, -0.11 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.04), and blood glucose (2 studies; mean differences, -0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.07). These workplace interventions targeting MVPA levels and known beneficial cardiometabolic health sequelae were of lower quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Workplace interventions variably improve MVPA levels and related cardiometabolic health sequelae of working-age women in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Our findings underscore the need for ongoing research in this area but also increased dissemination of the existing programs and knowledge.
BACKGROUND:Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death among women in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Physical activity is protective for cardiovascular disease. The realities of modern life require working-age women to address work-related, family, and social demands. Few working-age women meet current moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA) recommendations. Given that working-age women spend a substantial proportion of their waking hours at work, places of employment may be an opportune and a controlled setting to implement programs, improving MVPA levels and enhancing cardiometabolic health. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eight electronic databases were searched to identify all prospective cohort and experimental studies reporting an MVPA outcome of workplace interventions for working-age women (mean age, 18-65 years) in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool; quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A qualitative synthesis was performed for all studies, and meta-analyses were conducted where possible. Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria; 20 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Workplace interventions significantly increased minutes per week of metabolic equivalents (4 studies; standardized mean differences, 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.44 to 2.69), but not minutes per week of MVPA (13 studies; standardized mean differences, 0.38; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.92) or metabolic equivalents per week (3 studies; standardized mean differences, 0.11; 95% CI, -0.48 to 0.71). Workplace interventions also significantly decreased body mass (7 studies; mean differences, -0.83 kg; 95% CI, -1.64 to -0.02), body mass index (6 studies; mean differences, -0.35 kg/m2; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.07), low-density lipoprotein (4 studies; mean differences, -0.11 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.04), and blood glucose (2 studies; mean differences, -0.18 mmol/L; 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.07). These workplace interventions targeting MVPA levels and known beneficial cardiometabolic health sequelae were of lower quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Workplace interventions variably improve MVPA levels and related cardiometabolic health sequelae of working-age women in high-income Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Our findings underscore the need for ongoing research in this area but also increased dissemination of the existing programs and knowledge.
Authors: Patrick Timpel; Lorenz Harst; Doreen Reifegerste; Susann Weihrauch-Blüher; Peter E H Schwarz Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Stephanie A Prince; Cara G Elliott; Kyle Scott; Sarah Visintini; Jennifer L Reed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Matilde Leonardi; Davide Guido; Rui Quintas; Fabiola Silvaggi; Erika Guastafierro; Andrea Martinuzzi; Somnath Chatterji; Seppo Koskinen; Beata Tobiasz-Adamczyk; Josep Maria Haro; Maria Cabello; Alberto Raggi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-04-11 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Peter E H Schwarz; Patrick Timpel; Lorenz Harst; Colin J Greaves; Mohammed K Ali; Jeffrey Lambert; Mary Beth Weber; Mohamad M Almedawar; Henning Morawietz Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 24.094