| Literature DB >> 30513629 |
Yaira Barranco-Ruiz1,2, Alfredo Xavier Guevara-Paz3, Robinson Ramírez-Vélez4, Palma Chillón5, Emilio Villa-González6,7.
Abstract
Active commuting to and from school (ACS) could help to increase daily physical activity levels in youth; however, this association remains unknown in Ecuadorian youth. Thus, the aims of this study were (1) to determine the patterns of commuting to and from school and (2) to analyze the associations between ACS, physical activity (PA), and sedentary habits in Ecuadorian youth. A total of 732 students (65.3% males), aged 10⁻18 years (children = 246, young adolescents = 310, older adolescents = 162) from the central region of Ecuador participated in this study. A self-report questionnaire, including the usual mode and frequency of commuting, distance from home to school (PACO-Questionnaire), and PA and sedentary habits (YAP-Questionnaire), was used. Most of the sample lived ≤2 km from school; however, they were mainly passive commuters (96%). The most common mode of commuting was by car (to school = 43.4%, from school = 31.6%; p < 0.001). Children presented significantly higher scores (0⁻4) in PA outside school and total PA compared with older adolescents (2.20 ± 0.97 vs. 1.97 ± 0.96; p = 0.013 and 2.30 ± 0.76 vs. 2.09 ± 0.74, p = 0.019, respectively), as well as the lowest scores in sedentary habits (1.51 ± 0.65, p < 0.001). PA at school and total PA were positively associated with ACS (OR 3.137; 95% CI, 1.918 to 5.131; p < 0.001, and OR 2.543; 95% CI, 1.428 to 4.527; p = 0.002, respectively). In conclusion, passive modes of transportation were the most frequently used to commute to and from school in young Ecuadorians. PA at school and total PA were positively associated with ACS. Thus, interventions at school setting could be an opportunity to improve PA levels and additionally ACS in youth from the central region of Ecuador.Entities:
Keywords: mode of commuting; physical activity; transport to school; young; youth
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30513629 PMCID: PMC6313456 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15122704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Sociodemographic data of the participants.
| Characteristics | Total Sample | Children | Young | Older |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Male | 477 (65.3) | 138 (56.1) | 211 (68.3) | 119 (73.5) |
| Female | 254 (34.7) | 108 (43.9) | 98 (31.7) | 43 (26.5) |
| 13.7 (2.1) | 11.2 (0.7) | 14.1 (0.7) | 16.4 (0.35) | |
| 3.2 (3.0) | 2.8 (2.7) | 3.1 (3.1) | 3.8 (3.3) | |
| ≤2 km | 267 (38.4) | 93 (38.8) | 115 (38.6) | 59 (37.6) |
| 2–5 km | 226 (32.4) | 82 (34.2) | 92 (29.7) | 52 (33.1) |
| >5 km | 202 (29.2) | 65 (27.1) | 91 (28.4) | 46 (29.3) |
Data are presented as frequency and percentage n (%) of the overall sample and according to age groups. * Mean and standard deviation (SD).
Figure 1Mode of commuting to and from school for the whole sample.
Figure 2Modes of commuting to and from school according to age groups. A. Children, B. Young Adolescents and C. Older Adolescents.
Type of commuting to and from school and youth activity profile.
| Characteristics | Total ( | Children ( | Young Adolescents ( | Older Adolescents ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Passive ( | Passive ( | Passive ( | Passive ( | 0.255 | |
| Active ( | Active ( | Active ( | Active ( | |||
|
| Kruskal-Wallis test | Mann-Whitney test | ||||
|
| 2.27 (0.82) | 2.34 (0.80) | 2.26 (0.81) | 2.20 (0.86) | 0.210 | 0.189 |
|
| 2.11 (0.94) | 2.20 (0.97) b | 2.14 (0.92) | 1.97 (0.96) | 0.043 | 0.013 |
|
| 1.65 (0.73) | 1.51 (0.80) a,b | 1.72 (0.72) | 1.78 (0.66) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
|
| 2.20 (0.74) | 2.30 (0.76) b | 2.20 (0.73) | 2.09 (0.74) | 0.059 | 0.019 |
|
| 2.96 (0.94) | 3.13 (0.95) a,b | 2.95 (0.93) c | 2.70 (0.90) | <0.001 | <0.001 |
|
| 2.54 (0.77) | 2.67 (0.79) b | 2.55 (0.74) c | 2.33 (0.77) | <0.001 | 0.003 |
# Mean and standard deviation (SD). PA = Physical activity; YAP-Q = Youth Activity Profile questionnaire; * Participants were categorized as active when they used to commute to and from school (4 out of 10 possible trips/week) using active modes of commuting; ** YAP-Q categories without commuting questions; p = significative differences according to age groups (Chi-square test was used for comparing type of commuter; Kruskal–Wallis test for the YAP-Q categories); Mann–Whitney was used to analyze the following comparisons: a Children vs. young adolescents; b children vs. older adolescents; c young adolescents vs. older adolescents.
Figure 3Association between be active commuting to and from school and YAP-Q categories for the whole sample and by age groups. Red arrows indicate significant association.