| Literature DB >> 30740134 |
Sofia Evaristo1, Carla Moreira1, Luís Lopes1, André Oliveira1, Sandra Abreu1, César Agostinis-Sobrinho1,2, José Oliveira-Santos1, Susana Póvoas3, Rute Santos1, Jorge Mota1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Adolescents' physical fitness levels are an important indicator of their lifestyle and seem to have positive consequences in health-related quality of life (HRQoL).Entities:
Keywords: Cardiorespiratory fitness; Health-related quality of life; LabMed study; Muscular fitness; Physical fitness; Youth
Year: 2019 PMID: 30740134 PMCID: PMC6353732 DOI: 10.1016/j.jesf.2019.01.002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exerc Sci Fit ISSN: 1728-869X Impact factor: 3.103
Descriptive characteristics of the participants by sex.
| Total (n = 567) | Girls (n = 287) | Boys (n = 280) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) | 14.0 (1.7) | 14.1 (1.6) | 13.9 (1.7) | 0.581 | |
| Body mass (Kg) | 54.0 (12.4) | 52.8 (11.1) | 55.2 (13.6) | ||
| Stature (cm) | 159 (0.09) | 158 (0.06) | 161 (0.11) | < | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.1 (3.8) | 21.1 (3.7) | 21.1 (3.9) | 0.882 | |
| Pubertal stage A (I/II, III, IV, V) (%) | 8.3/34.7/45/12 | 4.5/31/51.9/12.5 | 12.1/38.6/37.9/11.4 | < | |
| Pubertal stage B (I/II, III, IV, V) (%) | 7.1/22.9/51.5/18.5 | 2.8/22.6/50.2/24.4 | 11.4/23.2/52.9/12.5 | < | |
| Long jump (cm) | 158.2 (30.1) | 145.4 (23.8) | 171.3 (30.2) | < | |
| Handgrip (kg) | 26.1 (7.2) | 23.2 (4.8) | 29.1 (8.0) | < | |
| Handgrip/body mass (kg) | 0.49 (0.11) | 0.44 (0.09) | 0.53 (0.12) | < | |
| Cardiorespiratory fitness – VO2max (mL/kg/min) | 42.3 (6.8) | 38.8 (4.8) | 45.9 (6.7) | < | |
| Daily average MVPA (minutes/day) | 56.9 (20.7) | 51.1 (19) | 62.9 (20.6) | < | |
| Muscular fitness score | −0.30 (1.6) | −0.29 (1.5) | 0.24 (1.7) | < | |
| KIMED index | 7.1 (2.1) | 7.3 (1.8) | 7.0 (2.3) | 0.086 | |
| Socioeconomic status | 6.4 (1.7) | 6.6 (1.7) | 6.2 (1.7) | ||
| Health-related quality of life (Kidscreeen-10) | 39.6 (5.4) | 39.1 (5.5) | 40.2 (5.3) | ||
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; MVPA, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity.
The data shown in percentage for categorical variables and mean (SD) for continuous variables.
p value was calculated based on Qui-squared test for categorical variables and t-test for continuous variables.
Regression analysis predicting Health Related Quality of Life.
| B (95% CI) | β | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 - Cardiorespiratory Fitness | 0.144 (0.094; 0.194) | 0.206 | < |
| Model 2 - Cardiorespiratory Fitness | 0.112 (0.030; 0.194) | 0.141 | |
| Model 3 - Muscular Fitness score | 0.412 (0.202; 0.622) | 0.135 | < |
| Model 4 - Muscular Fitness score | 0.328 (0.011; 0.646) | 0.098 | |
| Model 5 - Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Muscular Fitness score | 0.093 (0.004; 0.183) | 0.117 |
B Unstandardized coefficients; β: Standardized coefficients CI— confidence interval.
Model 1 and model 3 – unadjusted models; Model 2, model 4 and model 5 - adjusted for age, sex, pubertal stage, socioeconomic status, BMI, adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern, accelerometer wear time and daily average of MVPA.
Fig. 1Cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) mediation models of the relationship between muscular fitness and Health related quality of life (HRQoL), after adjusting for age, sex, pubertal stage, socioeconomic status, adherence to a Mediterranean dietary pattern, daily average of MVPA and accelerometer wear time. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.001.
Fig. 2Mean value of health-related quality of life (Kidscreen-10) stratified in groups of cardiorespiratory fitness (low or high) and muscular fitness score (low or high).
* Significantly different from group High Muscular Fitness/High Cardiorespiratory Fitness, p < 0.05. ** Significantly different from group High Muscular Fitness/High Cardiorespiratory Fitness, p < 0.05.
η2 = 0.