| Literature DB >> 34580067 |
Eli Puterman1, Benjamin Hives2, Nicole Mazara2, Nikol Grishin2, Joshua Webster2, Stacey Hutton3, Michael Stephen Koehle2,4, Yan Liu5, Mark R Beauchamp2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The number of adults across the globe with significant depressive symptoms has grown substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. The extant literature supports exercise as a potent behaviour that can significantly reduce depressive symptoms in clinical and non-clinical populations.Entities:
Keywords: depression; exercise; randomised controlled trial
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34580067 PMCID: PMC8483923 DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2021-104379
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Sports Med ISSN: 0306-3674 Impact factor: 18.473
Figure 1Consort diagram.
Participant demographic information
| Variable | All | WLC | HIIT | Yoga | HIIT+yoga | Baseline comparison |
| Age, years (SD) | 40.3 (12.4) | 41.0 (12.1) | 41.2 (12.7) | 37.8 (12.3) | 41.1 (12.6) |
|
| CESD, score (SD) | 10.3 (5.78) | 10.4 (5.54) | 10.8 (6.23) | 10.4 (5.87) | 9.41 (5.43) |
|
| Women, n (%) | 289 (87) | 74 (89) | 71 (87) | 72 (84) | 72 (87) |
|
| Income, n (%)* |
| |||||
| 0–40 000 | 30 (9) | 4 (5) | 11 (13) | 9 (10) | 6 (7) | |
| 40 001–80 000 | 68 (20) | 16 (19) | 12 (15) | 24 (28) | 16 (19) | |
| 80 001–120 000 | 66 (20) | 19 (23) | 14 (17) | 14 (16) | 19 (23) | |
| 120 001–160 000 | 51 (15) | 11 (13) | 12 (15) | 18 (21) | 10 (12) | |
| 160 000+ | 63 (19) | 20 (24) | 14 (17) | 11 (13) | 18 (22) | |
| No response | 56 (17) | 13 (16) | 19 (23) | 10 (12) | 14 (17) | |
| Employment status† |
| |||||
| Full time | 177 (53) | 50 (60) | 40 (49) | 40 (47) | 47 (57) | |
| Part time | 44 (13) | 10 (12) | 13 (16) | 13 (15) | 8 (10) | |
| Not working | 48 (14) | 9 (11) | 14 (17) | 14 (16) | 11 (13) | |
| Student | 45 (13) | 10 (12) | 10 (12) | 14 (16) | 11 (13) | |
| Other | 20 (6) | 4 (5) | 5 (6) | 5 (6) | 6 (7) | |
| Education‡ |
| |||||
| High school or less | 22 (7) | 3 (4) | 3 (4) | 10 (12) | 6 (7) | |
| College, trade school or certificate | 52 (16) | 10 (12) | 12 (15) | 15 (17) | 15 (18) | |
| Bachelor or equivalent | 139 (42) | 37 (45) | 34 (41) | 36 (42) | 32 (39) | |
| Postgraduate/professional training | 118 (35) | 33 (40) | 31 (38) | 24 (28) | 30 (36) | |
| No response | 3 (1) | 0 (0) | 2 (2) | 1 (1) | 0 (0) | |
| Ethnoracial identification§§ |
| |||||
| White, n (%) | 198 (59) | 50 (60) | 54 (66) | 43 (50) | 51 (61) | |
| Asian, n (%) | 87 (26) | 22 (27) | 16 (20) | 28 (33) | 21 (25) | |
| Other/multiple selections/did not answer, n (%) | 49 (15) | 11 (13) | 12 (15) | 15 (17) | 11 (13) | |
| Marital status¶ |
| |||||
| Married, n (%) | 187 (56) | 49 (59) | 48 (59) | 43 (50) | 47 (57) | |
| Separated/divorced/widowed, n (%) | 26 (8) | 7 (8) | 6 (7) | 5 (6) | 8 (10) | |
| Single, n (%) | 115 (34) | 27 (33) | 25 (30) | 36 (42) | 27 (33) | |
| Other/refused to/did not answer, n (%) | 6 (2) | 0 (0) | 3 (4) | 2 (2) | 1 (1) | |
| LCAT |
| |||||
| 1, n (%) | 19 (6) | 2 (2) | 4 (5) | 8 (9) | 5 (6) | |
| 2, n (%) | 172 (51) | 36 (43) | 49 (60) | 46 (53) | 41 (49) | |
| 3, n (%) | 143 (43) | 45 (54) | 29 (35) | 32 (37) | 37 (45) | |
Note: data are presented for all participants (all) and separated by randomisation group (waitlist control (WLC); high intensity interval training (HIIT); yoga (yoga); combination (HIIT+yoga)). All group comparisons between continuous variables were complete using one-way analyses of variance; the comparisons between categorical variables were done using χ2 tests.
*For details of how the categories were formed, please see online supplemental table S3.
†For details of how the categories were formed, please see online supplemental table S4.
‡For details of how the categories were formed, please see online supplemental table S5.
§For details of how the categories were formed, please see online supplemental table S6.
¶For details of how the categories were formed, please see online supplemental table S7.
CESD, Centre for Epidemiological Studies – Depression Scale; LCAT, Stanford Leisure Time Activity Categorical Item.
Figure 2Exercise adherence rates by experimental condition.
Estimates for trajectories for WLC (A) and comparisons with active treatment groups (B1–3)
| Estimate | SE | 95% CI | |
| A. Estimates, SE and 95% CI for intercept (I), slope (S) and quadratic (Q) terms for WLC | |||
| I |
|
|
|
| S | −0.15 | 0.26 | −0.65 to 0.38 |
| Q | −0.01 | 0.04 | −0.09 to 0.07 |
| B. Estimates for differences between each group and WLC | |||
|
| |||
| HIIT versus WLC | 0.26 | 0.87 | −1.46 to 1.97 |
| Yoga versus WLC | −0.34 | 0.86 | −2.02 to 1.34 |
| HIIT+yoga versus WLC | −1.27 | 0.83 | −2.89 to 0.35 |
|
| |||
| HIIT versus WLC | − |
| − |
| Yoga versus WLC | −0.70 | 0.40 | −1.49 to 0.08 |
| HIIT+yoga versus WLC | − |
| − |
|
| |||
| HIIT versus WLC | 0.11 | 0.06 | 0.00 to 0.22 |
| Yoga versus WLC | 0.08 | 0.06 | −0.05 to 0.20 |
| HIIT+yoga versus WLC | 0.11 | 0.06 | −0.01 to 0.23 |
Results from the SEM model estimating intercept, slope and quadratic term for WLC (section A) and comparisons of these estimates with those of the three active groups (HIIT, yoga, HIIT+yoga; section B). Bold text denotes p<0.05.
HIIT, high intensity interval training; SEM, structural equation model; WLC, waitlist control.
Figure 3Trajectories and effect sizes for depressive symptoms over the course of the study. Note: figure 3A shows each group’s trajectories, in the full sample, while figure 3B show the trajectories for those with high (CESD score ≥10) levels of depressive symptoms. Figure 3C, D represent the effect sizes at each time point, for all participants and those with high levels of depressive symptoms, respectively. CESD, Center for Epidemiological Studies – Depression Scale; HIIT, high intensity interval training; WLC, waitlist control.