Replacing sitting time with standing or stepping: associations with cardio-metabolic risk biomarkers

To systematically review and provide an informative synthesis of findings from longitudinal studies published since 1996 reporting on relationships between self-reported sedentary behavior and device-based measures of sedentary time with health-related outcomes in adults. Studies published between 1996 and January 2011 were identified by examining existing literature reviews and by systematic searches in Web of Science, MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsycINFO. English-written articles were selected according to study design, targeted behavior, and health outcome. Forty-eight articles met the inclusion criteria; of these, 46 incorporated self-reported measures including total sitting time; TV viewing time only; TV viewing time and other screen-time behaviors; and TV viewing time plus other sedentary behaviors. Findings indicate a consistent relationship of self-reported sedentary behavior with mortality and with weight gain from childhood to the adult years. However, findings were mixed for associations with disease incidence, weight gain during adulthood, and cardiometabolic risk. Of the three studies that used device-based measures of sedentary time, one showed that markers of obesity predicted sedentary time, whereas inconclusive findings have been observed for markers of insulin resistance. There is a growing body of evidence that sedentary behavior may be a distinct risk factor, independent of physical activity, for multiple adverse health outcomes in adults. Prospective studies using device-based measures are required to provide a clearer understanding of the impact of sedentary time on health outcomes. Copyright © 2011 American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show more

A primary barrier to elucidating the association between sedentary behavior (SB) and health outcomes is the lack of valid monitors to assess SB in a free-living environment. The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of commercially available monitors to assess SB. Twenty overweight (mean ± SD: body mass index = 33.7 ± 5.7 kg·m(-2)) inactive, office workers age 46.5 ± 10.7 yr were directly observed for two 6-h periods while wearing an activPAL (AP) and an ActiGraph GT3X (AG). During the second observation, participants were instructed to reduce sitting time. We assessed the validity of the commonly used cut point of 100 counts per minute (AG100) and several additional AG cut points for defining SB. We used direct observation (DO) using focal sampling with duration coding to record either sedentary (sitting/lying) or nonsedentary behavior. The accuracy and precision of the monitors and the sensitivity of the monitors to detect reductions in sitting time were assessed using mixed-model repeated-measures analyses. On average, the AP and the AG100 underestimated sitting time by 2.8% and 4.9%, respectively. The correlation between the AP and DO was R2 = 0.94, and the AG100 and DO sedentary minutes was R2 = 0.39. Only the AP was able to detect reductions in sitting time. The AG 150-counts-per-minute threshold demonstrated the lowest bias (1.8%) of the AG cut points. The AP was more precise and more sensitive to reductions in sitting time than the AG, and thus, studies designed to assess SB should consider using the AP. When the AG monitor is used, 150 counts per minute may be the most appropriate cut point to define SB. Show more