| Literature DB >> 36060889 |
Lejun Wang1, Hua Yang1,2, Xiaoqian Song1, Ce Wang1, Minjie Qiao1, Haifeng Tao1, Wenxin Niu3, Ruijie Li1.
Abstract
Objective: Information technology (IT) population in China has expanded rapidly in recent decades, which has suffered severe health problems due to a lack of physical activity (PA). However, little is known about the influence and solutions of PA deficiency. The current research was designed to explore the associations between the amount of PA and potential influenced factors based on the social-ecological model (SEM) and thus to provide rationales for PA promotion. Method: Six hundred and five IT professionals from five cities of China were surveyed in terms of PA in daily life as well as the potential PA influence factors based on SEM models that consisted of individual, interpersonal, environmental, and political levels in the current study. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were conducted to examine the association of the potential PA influence factors and PA amount. Result: About 54.7% of the sample did not fulfill the PA recommendation of 600 MET per week, and there are significant gender differences in PA participation. Factors related to the individual (self-efficacy and value recognition), interpersonal (social support), environmental (workplace and community environment), and polity-level factors (policy advocacy) were found to be significantly associated with Chinese IT professionals' participation in PA.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36060889 PMCID: PMC9439895 DOI: 10.1155/2022/4580589
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Public Health ISSN: 1687-9805
Demographic characteristics of participants, by PA.
| Variables | PA level |
| % |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LPA | MPA | VPA | |||||
| Gender | 21.581 |
| |||||
| Male | 189 | 136 | 61 | 386 | 63.80% | ||
| Female | 142 | 65 | 12 | 219 | 36.20% | ||
|
| |||||||
| Age (year) | 2.489 |
| |||||
| ≤25 | 51 | 33 | 13 | 97 | 16.03% | ||
| 26–35 | 185 | 104 | 39 | 328 | 54.21% | ||
| 36–45 | 89 | 57 | 20 | 166 | 27.44% | ||
| 46–60 | 6 | 7 | 1 | 14 | 2.31% | ||
|
| |||||||
| Education | 21.850 |
| |||||
| Doctoral degree | 7 | 8 | 6 | 21 | 3.47% | ||
| Master's degree | 59 | 59 | 23 | 141 | 23.31% | ||
| Bachelor's degree | 207 | 102 | 33 | 342 | 56.53% | ||
| Associate degree | 51 | 30 | 9 | 90 | 14.88% | ||
| HS graduate/less than HS | 7 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 1.82% | ||
| Marital status | 18.112 |
| |||||
| Single, never married | 127 | 114 | 34 | 275 | 45.45% | ||
| Married | 201 | 86 | 39 | 326 | 53.88% | ||
| Separated/divorced | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 0.66% | ||
|
| |||||||
| Income (RMB/YEAR) | 12.555 |
| |||||
| ≤100,000 | 113 | 56 | 19 | 188 | 31.07% | ||
| 100,000–200,000 | 102 | 54 | 20 | 176 | 29.09% | ||
| 200000–300000 | 55 | 33 | 11 | 99 | 16.36% | ||
| 300,000–400,000 | 23 | 23 | 6 | 52 | 8.60% | ||
| >400,000 | 38 | 35 | 17 | 90 | 14.88% | ||
|
| |||||||
| Work experience | 2.831 |
| |||||
| <3 years | 94 | 63 | 20 | 177 | 29.26% | ||
| 3–6 year (exclude 6 years) | 71 | 40 | 19 | 130 | 21.49% | ||
| 6–10 years (exclude 10 years) | 72 | 38 | 14 | 124 | 20.50% | ||
| 10–15 years (exclude 15 years) | 70 | 41 | 15 | 126 | 20.83% | ||
| ≥15 years | 24 | 19 | 5 | 48 | 7.93% | ||
|
| |||||||
| Perceived health | 37.904 |
| |||||
| Very good | 14 | 21 | 18 | 53 | 8.76% | ||
| Rather good | 107 | 75 | 30 | 212 | 35.04% | ||
| Subhealth | 187 | 91 | 23 | 301 | 49.75% | ||
| Rather poor | 21 | 13 | 2 | 36 | 5.95% | ||
| Very poor | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0.50% | ||
LPA: light PA, MPA: moderate PA, and VPA: vigorous PA. Notes: P=<0.05, P=<0.001, and P=<0.0001.
Descriptive statistics of SEM factors and PA levels among subjects, by PA level (N = 605).
| Variable | Mean ± SD | PA level |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LPA | MPA | VPA | ||||
| PA level | 788.30 ± 609.16 | 405.49 ± 96.43 | 932.16 ± 250.42 | 2127.98 ± 587.32 | 2,551.905 |
|
|
| ||||||
| Individual level | ||||||
| Self-efficacy | 28.32 ± 5.95 | 27.11 ± 6.30 | 29.46 ± 5.02 | 30.67 ± 5.39 | 33.144 |
|
| Value recognition | 11.50 ± 4.07 | 10.74 ± 3.27 | 12.13 ± 4.49 | 13.25 ± 5.12 | 31.256 |
|
|
| ||||||
| Interpersonal level | ||||||
| Social support | 13.36 ± 3.46 | 12.84 ± 3.01 | 14.04 ± 3.59 | 13.80 ± 4.25 | 12.082 |
|
|
| ||||||
| Environment level | ||||||
| Facility environment | 11.12 ± 4.07 | 11.19 ± 3.83 | 11.21 ± 4.00 | 10.56 ± 5.16 | 0.812 |
|
| Workplace/community environment | 27.41 ± 8.46 | 26.19 ± 7.78 | 28.80 ± 8.67 | 29.12 ± 9.92 | 13.627 |
|
|
| ||||||
| Political level | ||||||
| Political advocacy | 5.62 ± 2.23 | 5.22 ± 2.10 | 6.12 ± 2.19 | 6.08 ± 2.51 | 20.182 |
|
LPA: light PA, MPA: moderate PA, and VPA: vigorous PA. aUsing the analysis of variance. P < =001 and P < 0.0001.
Spearman Correlations between PA level and SEM constructs (N = 605).
| Variable | PA level | SEM constructs | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SE | VR | SS | FE | WE/CE | PA | ||
| PA level | 1 | ||||||
| Self-efficacy | 0.233 | 1 | |||||
| Value recognition | 0.248 | 0.035 | 1 | ||||
| Social support | 0.177 | 0.458 | −0.215 | 1 | |||
| Facility environment | −0.034 | −0.257 | 0.541 | -0.367 | 1 | ||
| Workplace/community environment | 0.159 | 0.277 | −0.174 | 0.521 | −0.249 | 1 | |
| Political advocacy | 0.210 | 0.307 | −0.112 | 0.478 | −0.295 | 0.590 | 1 |
SE: self-efficacy, VR: value recognition, SS: social support, FE: facility environment, WE/CE: workplace/community environment, and PA: political advocacy. Note.P < 0.0001.
Results of hierarchical regression analyses explaining PA-related factors according to SEM.
| Step/predictor variable |
| Δ | Betaa | 95% CI |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| Step 1: individual level | 0.08 | 0.083 | — | — | — | 27.296 |
|
| Self-efficacy | — | — | 0.118 | 3.062 | 21.082 | — | — |
| Value recognition | — | — | 0.295 | 30.033 | 58.588 | — | — |
| Step 2: interpersonal level | 0.089 | 0.010 | — | — | — | 20.635 |
|
| Social support | —- | — | 0.015 | −15.683 | 20.871 | ||
| Step 3: environment level | 0.107 | 0.021 | — | — | — | 15.454 |
|
| Facility environment | — | — | −0.13 | −34.456 | -4.518 | — | — |
| Workplace/community environment | — | — | 0.061 | −3.219 | 11.977 | — | — |
| Step 4: political level | 0.112 | 0.007 | — | — | — | 13.702 |
|
| Political advocacy | — | — | 0.109 | 2.186 | 57.325 | — | — |
aStandardized regression coefficients.