Domains of physical activity and all-cause mortality: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies

Background The dose–response relation between physical activity and all-cause mortality is not well defined at present. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the association with all-cause mortality of different domains of physical activity and of defined increases in physical activity and energy expenditure. Methods MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched up to September 2010 for cohort studies examining all-cause mortality across different domains and levels of physical activity in adult general populations. We estimated combined risk ratios (RRs) associated with defined increments and recommended levels, using random-effects meta-analysis and dose–response meta-regression models. Results Data from 80 studies with 1 338 143 participants (118 121 deaths) were included. Combined RRs comparing highest with lowest activity levels were 0.65 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.60–0.71] for total activity, 0.74 (95% CI 0.70–0.77) for leisure activity, 0.64 (95% CI 0.55–0.75) for activities of daily living and 0.83 (95% CI 0.71–0.97) for occupational activity. RRs per 1-h increment per week were 0.91 (95% CI 0.87–0.94) for vigorous exercise and 0.96 (95% CI 0.93–0.98) for moderate-intensity activities of daily living. RRs corresponding to 150 and 300 min/week of moderate to vigorous activity were 0.86 (95% CI 0.80–0.92) and 0.74 (95% CI 0.65–0.85), respectively. Mortality reductions were more pronounced in women. Conclusion Higher levels of total and domain-specific physical activity were associated with reduced all-cause mortality. Risk reduction per unit of time increase was largest for vigorous exercise. Moderate-intensity activities of daily living were to a lesser extent beneficial in reducing mortality.

Dyadic action control in overweight and obese couples: Effectiveness of a randomized controlled trial to promote physical activity.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing physical activity in overweight and obese individuals is an important means to promote health in this target population. The Health Action Process Approach (HAPA), which was the theoretical framework of this study, focuses on individual self-regulation variables for successful health behavior change. One key self-regulation variable of this model is action control with its three subfacets awareness of intentions, self-monitoring and regulatory effort. The social context of individuals, however, is usually neglected in common health behavior change theories. In order to integrate social influences into the HAPA, this randomized controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of a dyadic conceptualization of action control for promoting physical activity. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol describes the design of a single-blind randomized controlled trial, which comprises four experimental groups: a dyadic action control group, an individual action control group and two control groups. Participants of this study are overweight or obese, heterosexual adult couples who intend to increase their physical activity. Blocking as means of a gender-balanced randomization is used to allocate couples to conditions and partners to either being the target person of the intervention or to the partner condition. The ecological momentary intervention takes place in the first 14 days after baseline assessment and is followed by another 14 days diary phase without intervention. Follow-ups are one month and six months later. Subsequent to the six-months follow-up another 14 days diary phase takes place.The main outcome measures are self-reported and accelerometer-assessed physical activity. Secondary outcome measures are Body Mass Index (BMI), aerobic fitness and habitual physical activity. DISCUSSION: This is the first study examining a dyadic action control intervention in comparison to an individual action control condition and two control groups applying a single-blind randomized control trial. Challenges with running couples studies as well as advantages and disadvantages of certain design-related decisions are discussed. This RCT was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (PP00P1_133632/1) and was registered on 27/04/2012 at http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15705531.

Comparison of energy expenditure, eating pattern and physical activity of grazing and zero-grazing dairy cows at different time points during lactation

An experiment was conducted to determine the effect of grazing versus zero-grazing on energy expenditure (EE), feeding behaviour and physical activity in dairy cows at different stages of lactation. Fourteen Holstein cows were subjected to two treatments in a repeated crossover design with three experimental series (S1, S2, and S3) reflecting increased days in milk (DIM). At the beginning of each series, cows were on average at 38, 94 and 171 (standard deviation (SD) 10.8) DIM, respectively. Each series consisted of two periods containing a 7-d adaptation and a 7-d collection period each. Cows either grazed on pasture for 16–18.5 h per day or were kept in a freestall barn and had ad libitum access to herbage harvested from the same paddock. Herbage intake was estimated using the double alkane technique. On each day of the collection period, EE of one cow in the barn and of one cow on pasture was determined for 6 h by using the 13C bicarbonate dilution technique, with blood sample collection done either manually in the barn or using an automatic sampling system on pasture. Furthermore, during each collection period physical activity and feeding behaviour of cows were recorded over 3 d using pedometers and behaviour recorders. Milk yield decreased with increasing DIM (P<0.001) but was similar with both treatments. Herbage intake was lower (P<0.01) for grazing cows (16.8 kg dry matter (DM)/d) compared to zero-grazing cows (18.9 kg DM/d). The lowest (P<0.001) intake was observed in S1 and similar intakes were observed in S2 and S3. Within the 6-h measurement period, grazing cows expended 19% more (P<0.001) energy (319 versus 269 kJ/kg metabolic body size (BW0.75)) than zero-grazing cows and differences in EE did not change with increasing DIM. Grazing cows spent proportionally more (P<0.001) time walking and less time standing (P<0.001) and lying (P<0.05) than zero-grazing cows. The proportion of time spent eating was greater (P<0.001) and that of time spent ruminating was lower (P<0.05) for grazing cows compared to zero-grazing cows. In conclusion, lower feed intake along with the unchanged milk production indicates that grazing cows mobilized body reserves to cover additional energy requirements which were at least partly caused by more physical activity. However, changes in cows׳ behaviour between the considered time points during lactation were too small so that differences in EE remained similar between treatments with increasing DIM.