Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) are more sedentary compared with the general population, but contemporary cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes do not specifically target sedentary behaviour (SB). We developed a 12-week, hybrid (centre-based+home-based) Sedentary behaviour IntervenTion as a personaLisEd Secondary prevention Strategy (SIT LESS). The SIT LESS programme is tailored to the needs of patients with CAD, using evidence-based behavioural change methods and an activity tracker connected to an online dashboard to enable self-monitoring and remote coaching. Following the intervention mapping principles, we first identified determinants of SB from literature to adapt theory-based methods and practical applications to target SB and then evaluated the intervention in advisory board meetings with patients and nurse specialists. This resulted in four core components of SIT LESS: (1) patient education, (2) goal setting, (3) motivational interviewing with coping planning, and (4) (tele)monitoring using a pocket-worn activity tracker connected to a smartphone application and providing vibrotactile feedback after prolonged sedentary bouts. We hypothesise that adding SIT LESS to contemporary CR will reduce SB in patients with CAD to a greater extent compared with usual care. Therefore, 212 patients with CAD will be recruited from two Dutch hospitals and randomised to CR (control) or CR+SIT LESS (intervention). Patients will be assessed prior to, immediately after and 3 months after CR. The primary comparison relates to the pre-CR versus post-CR difference in SB (objectively assessed in min/day) between the control and intervention groups. Secondary outcomes include between-group differences in SB characteristics (eg, number of sedentary bouts); change in SB 3 months after CR; changes in light-intensity and moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity; quality of life; and patients’ competencies for self-management. Outcomes of the SIT LESS randomised clinical trial will provide novel insight into the effectiveness of a structured, hybrid and personalised behaviour change intervention to attenuate SB in patients with CAD participating in CR.
MULTIFILE
Background A high sedentary time is associated with increased mortality risk. Previous studies indicate that replacement of sedentary time with light- and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity attenuates the risk for adverse outcomes and improves cardiovascular risk factors. Patients with cardiovascular disease are more sedentary compared to the general population, while daily time spent sedentary remains high following contemporary cardiac rehabilitation programmes. This clinical trial investigated the effectiveness of a sedentary behaviour intervention as a personalised secondary prevention strategy (SIT LESS) on changes in sedentary time among patients with coronary artery disease participating in cardiac rehabilitation. Methods Patients were randomised to usual care (n = 104) or SIT LESS (n = 108). Both groups received a comprehensive 12-week centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programme with face-to-face consultations and supervised exercise sessions, whereas SIT LESS participants additionally received a 12-week, nurse-delivered, hybrid behaviour change intervention in combination with a pocket-worn activity tracker connected to a smartphone application to continuously monitor sedentary time. Primary outcome was the change in device-based sedentary time between pre- to post-rehabilitation. Changes in sedentary time characteristics (prevalence of prolonged sedentary bouts and proportion of patients with sedentary time ≥ 9.5 h/day); time spent in light-intensity and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; step count; quality of life; competencies for self-management; and cardiovascular risk score were assessed as secondary outcomes. Results Patients (77% male) were 63 ± 10 years and primarily diagnosed with myocardial infarction (78%). Sedentary time decreased in SIT LESS (− 1.6 [− 2.1 to − 1.1] hours/day) and controls (− 1.2 [ ─1.7 to − 0.8]), but between group differences did not reach statistical significance (─0.4 [─1.0 to 0.3]) hours/day). The post-rehabilitation proportion of patients with a sedentary time above the upper limit of normal (≥ 9.5 h/day) was significantly lower in SIT LESS versus controls (48% versus 72%, baseline-adjusted odds-ratio 0.4 (0.2–0.8)). No differences were observed in the other predefined secondary outcomes. Conclusions Among patients with coronary artery disease participating in cardiac rehabilitation, SIT LESS did not induce significantly greater reductions in sedentary time compared to controls, but delivery was feasible and a reduced odds of a sedentary time ≥ 9.5 h/day was observed.
MULTIFILE
Background: Osteoarthritis is one of the most common chronic joint diseases, mostly affecting the knee or hip through pain, joint stiffness and decreased physical functioning in daily life. Regular physical activity (PA) can help preserve and improve physical functioning and reduce pain in patients with osteoarthritis. Interventions aiming to improve movement behaviour can be optimized by tailoring them to a patients' starting point; their current movement behaviour. Movement behaviour needs to be assessed in its full complexity, and therefore a multidimensional description is needed. Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify subgroups based on movement behaviour patterns in patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis who are eligible for a PA intervention. Second, differences between subgroups regarding Body Mass Index, sex, age, physical functioning, comorbidities, fatigue and pain were determined between subgroups. Methods: Baseline data of the clinical trial 'e-Exercise Osteoarthritis', collected in Dutch primary care physical therapy practices were analysed. Movement behaviour was assessed with ActiGraph GT3X and GT3X+ accelerometers. Groups with similar patterns were identified using a hierarchical cluster analysis, including six clustering variables indicating total time in and distribution of PA and sedentary behaviours. Differences in clinical characteristics between groups were assessed via Kruskall Wallis and Chi2 tests. Results: Accelerometer data, including all daily activities during 3 to 5 subsequent days, of 182 patients (average age 63 years) with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis were analysed. Four patterns were identified: inactive & sedentary, prolonged sedentary, light active and active. Physical functioning was less impaired in the group with the active pattern compared to the inactive & sedentary pattern. The group with the prolonged sedentary pattern experienced lower levels of pain and fatigue and higher levels of physical functioning compared to the light active and compared to the inactive & sedentary. Conclusions: Four subgroups with substantially different movement behaviour patterns and clinical characteristics can be identified in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and/or knee. Knowledge about these subgroups can be used to personalize future movement behaviour interventions for this population.
LINK
The aim of the current study was to examine the effectiveness of a school-centered multicomponent PA intervention, called ‘Active Living’, on children's daily PA levels. A quasi-experimental design was used including 9 intervention schools and 9 matched control schools located in the Netherlands. The baseline measurement took place between March–June 2013, and follow-up measurements were conducted 12 months afterwards. Accelerometer (ActiGraph, GT3X +) data of 520 children aged 8–11 years were collected and supplemented with demographics and weather conditions data. Implementation magnitude of the interventions was measured by keeping logbooks on the number of implemented physical environmental interventions (PEIs) and social environmental interventions (SEIs). Multilevel multivariate linear regression analyses were used to study changes in sedentary behavior (SB), light physical activity (LPA) and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) between baseline and follow-up. Finally, effect sizes (ESs) were calculated using Cohen's d. No pooled effects on PA and SB were found between children exposed and not exposed to Active Living after 12 months. However, children attending Active Living schools that implemented larger numbers of both PEIs and SEIs engaged in 15 more minutes of LPA per weekday at follow-up than children in the control condition (ES = 0.41; p < .05). Moreover, children attending these schools spent less time in SB at follow-up (ES = 0.33), although this effect was non-significant. No significant effects were found on MVPA. A school-centered multicomponent PA intervention holds the potential to activate children, but a comprehensive set of intervention elements with a sufficient magnitude is necessary to achieve at least moderate effect sizes.
MULTIFILE
Stroke is the second most common cause of death and the third leading cause of disability worldwide,1,2 with the burden expected to increase during the next 20 years.1 Almost 40% of the people with stroke have a recurrent stroke within 10 years,3 making secondary prevention vital.3,4 High amounts of sedentary time have been found to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease,5–11 particularly when the sedentary time is accumulated in prolonged bouts.12–15 Sedentary behavior, is defined as “any waking behavior characterized by an energy expenditure ≤1.5 Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METs) while in a sitting, reclining or lying posture”.16,17 Studies in healthy people, as well as people with diabetes and obesity, have shown that reducing the total amount of sedentary time and/or breaking up long periods of uninterrupted sedentary time, reduces metabolic risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease.6,9,10,12–15 Recent studies have shown that people living in the community after stroke spend more time each day sedentary, and more time in uninterrupted bouts of sedentary time compared to age-matched healthy peers.18–20 Reducing sedentary time and breaking up long sedentary bouts with short bursts of activity may be a promising intervention to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke and other cardiovascular diseases in people with stroke. To develop effective interventions, it is important to understand the factors associated with sedentary time in people with stroke. Previous studies have found associations between self-reported physical function after stroke and total sedentary time, but inconsistent results with regards to the relationship of age, stroke severity, and walking speed with sedentary time.20,21 These results are from secondary analyses of single-site observational studies, not powered to address associations, and inconsistent in the methods used to determine waking hours; thus making direct comparisons between studies difficult.20,21 Individual participant data pooling, with consistent processing of wake time data, allows novel exploratory analyses of larger datasets with greater power. By pooling all available individual participant data internationally, this study aimed to comprehensively explore the factors associated with sedentary time in community-dwelling people with stroke. Specifically, our research questions were: (1) What factors are associated with total sedentary time during waking hours after stroke? (2) What factors are associated with time spent in prolonged sedentary bouts during waking hours?
DOCUMENT
Background/Objectives: Homecare staff often take over activities instead of “doing activities with” clients, thereby hampering clients from remaining active in daily life. Training and supporting staff to integrate reablement into their working practices may reduce clients' sedentary behavior and improve their independence. This study evaluated the effectiveness of the “Stay Active at Home” (SAaH) reablement training program for homecare staff on older homecare clients' sedentary behavior. Design: Cluster randomized controlled trial (c-RCT). Setting: Dutch homecare (10 nursing teams comprising a total of 313 staff members). Participants: 264 clients (aged ≥65 years). Intervention: SAaH seeks to equip staff with knowledge, attitude, and skills on reablement, and to provide social and organizational support to implement reablement in homecare practice. SAaH consists of program meetings, practical assignments, and weekly newsletters over a 9-month period. The control group received no additional training and delivered care as usual. Measurements: Sedentary behavior (primary outcome) was measured using tri-axial wrist-worn accelerometers. Secondary outcomes included daily functioning (GARS), physical functioning (SPPB), psychological functioning (PHQ-9), and falls. Data were collected at baseline and at 12 months; data on falls were also collected at 6 months. Intention-to-treat analyses using mixed-effects linear and logistic regression were performed. Results: We found no statistically significant differences between the study groups for sedentary time expressed as daily minutes (adjusted mean difference: β 18.5 (95% confidence interval [CI] 22.4, 59.3), p = 0.374) and as proportion of wake/wear time (β 0.6 [95% CI 1.5, 2.6], p = 0.589) or for most secondary outcomes. Conclusion: Our c-RCT showed no evidence for the effectiveness of SAaH for all client outcomes. Refining SAaH, by adding components that intervene directly on homecare clients, may optimize the program and require further research. Additional research should explore the effectiveness of SAaH on behavioral determinants of clients and staff and cost-effectiveness.
DOCUMENT
Background: The environment affects children’s energy balance-related behaviors to a considerable extent. A context-based physical activity and nutrition school- and family-based intervention, named KEIGAAF, is being implemented in low socio-economic neighborhoods in Eindhoven, The Netherlands. The aim of this study was to investigate: 1) the effectiveness of the KEIGAAF intervention on BMI z-score, waist circumference, physical activity, sedentary behavior, nutrition behavior, and physical fitness of primary school children, and 2) the process related to the implementation of the intervention. Methods: A quasi-experimental, controlled study with eight intervention schools and three control schools was conducted. The KEIGAAF intervention consists of a combined top-down and bottom-up school intervention: a steering committee developed the general KEIGAAF principles (top-down), and in accordance with these principles, KEIGAAF working groups subsequently develop and implement the intervention in their local context (bottom-up). Parents are also invited to participate in a family-based parenting program, i.e., Triple P Lifestyle. Children aged 7 to 10 years old (grades 4 to 6 in the Netherlands) are included in the study. Effect evaluation data is collected at baseline, after one year, and after two years by using a child questionnaire, accelerometers, anthropometry, a physical fitness test, and a parent questionnaire. A mixed methods approach is applied for the process evaluation: quantitative (checklists, questionnaires) and qualitative methods (observations, interviews) are used. To analyze intervention effectiveness, multilevel regression analyses will be conducted. Content analyses will be conducted on the qualitative process data. Discussion: Two important environmental settings, the school environment and the family environment, are simultaneously targeted in the KEIGAAF intervention. The combined top-down and bottom-up approach is expected to make the intervention an effective and sustainable version of the Health Promoting Schools framework. An elaborate process evaluation will be conducted alongside an effect evaluation in which multiple data collection sources (both qualitative and quantitative) are used.
DOCUMENT
Background: According to the principles of Reablement, home care services are meant to be goal-oriented, holistic and person-centred taking into account the capabilities and opportunities of older adults. However, home care services traditionally focus on doing things for older adults rather than with them. To implement Reablement in practice, the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme was developed. It is assumed that the programme leads to a reduction in sedentary behaviour in older adults and consequently more cost-effective outcomes in terms of their health and wellbeing. However, this has yet to be proven. Methods/ design: A two-group cluster randomised controlled trial with 12 months follow-up will be conducted. Ten nursing teams will be selected, pre-stratified on working area and randomised into an intervention group (‘Stay Active at Home’) or control group (no training). All nurses of the participating teams are eligible to participate in the study. Older adults and, if applicable, their domestic support workers (DSWs) will be allocated to the intervention or control group as well, based on the allocation of the nursing team. Older adults are eligible to participate, if they: 1) receive homecare services by the selected teams; and 2) are 65 years or older. Older adults will be excluded if they: 1) are terminally ill or bedbound; 2) have serious cognitive or psychological problems; or 3) are unable to communicate in Dutch. DSWs are eligible to participate if they provide services to clients who fulfil the eligibility criteria for older adults. The study consists of an effect evaluation (primary outcome: sedentary behaviour in older adults), an economic evaluation and a process evaluation. Data for the effect and economic evaluation will be collected at baseline and 6 and/or 12 months after baseline using performance-based and self-reported measures. In addition, data from client records will be extracted. A mixed-methods design will be applied for the process evaluation, collecting data of older adults and professionals throughout the study period. Discussion: This study will result in evidence about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and feasibility of the ‘Stay Active at Home’ programme.
DOCUMENT
AbstractBackground: Ecological models are currently the most used approaches to classify and conceptualise determinantsof sedentary behaviour, but these approaches are limited in their ability to capture the complexity of and interplaybetween determinants. The aim of the project described here was to develop a transdisciplinary dynamic framework,grounded in a system-based approach, for research on determinants of sedentary behaviour across the life span andintervention and policy planning and evaluation.Methods: A comprehensive concept mapping approach was used to develop the Systems Of Sedentary behaviours(SOS) framework, involving four main phases: (1) preparation, (2) generation of statements, (3) structuring (sorting andranking), and (4) analysis and interpretation. The first two phases were undertaken between December 2013 andFebruary 2015 by the DEDIPAC KH team (DEterminants of DIet and Physical Activity Knowledge Hub). The lasttwo phases were completed during a two-day consensus meeting in June 2015.
DOCUMENT
Background: There is increasing interest in the role that technology can play in improving the vitality of knowledge workers. A promising and widely adopted strategy to attain this goal is to reduce sedentary behavior (SB) and increase physical activity (PA). In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art SB and PA interventions using technology in the office environment. By scoping the existing landscape, we identified current gaps and underexplored possibilities. We discuss opportunities for future development and research on SB and PA interventions using technology. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in the Association for Computing Machinery digital library, the interdisciplinary library Scopus, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Xplore Digital Library to locate peer-reviewed scientific articles detailing SB and PA technology interventions in office environments between 2009 and 2019. Results: The initial search identified 1130 articles, of which 45 studies were included in the analysis. Our scoping review focused on the technologies supporting the interventions, which were coded using a grounded approach. Conclusion: Our findings showed that current SB and PA interventions using technology provide limited possibilities for physically active ways of working as opposed to the common strategy of prompting breaks. Interventions are also often offered as additional systems or services, rather than integrated into existing office infrastructures. With this work, we have mapped different types of interventions and provide an increased understanding of the opportunities for future multidisciplinary development and research of technologies to address sedentary behavior and physical activity in the office context
DOCUMENT
