Associations of occupational and leisure-time physical activity with all-cause mortality: an individual participant data meta-analysis

Author:

Coenen PieterORCID,Huysmans Maaike A,Holtermann AndreasORCID,Troiano Richard PORCID,Mork Paul Jarle,Krokstad Steinar,Clays Els,Cillekens Bart,De Bacquer DirkORCID,Aadahl MetteORCID,Kårhus Line LundORCID,Sjøl Anette,Andersen Lars BoORCID,Kauhanen Jussi,Voutilainen Ari,Pulsford Richard M,Stamatakis EmmanuelORCID,Goldbourt Uri,Peters Annette,Thorand Barbara,Rosengren Annika,Björck Lena,Sprow Kyle,Franzon Kristin,Rodriguez-Barranco Miguel,Luján-Barroso Leila,Knutsson Anders,Alfredsson Lars,Bahls MartinORCID,Ittermann Till,Kluttig Alexander,Hassan Lamiaa,Wanner MiriamORCID,Bopp MatthiasORCID,Marott Jacob Louis,Schnohr Peter,Nordestgaard Børge Grønne,Dalene Knut Eirik,Ekelund Ulf,Clausen Johan,Jensen Magnus Thorsten,Petersen Christina BjørkORCID,Krause Niklas,Twisk Jos,Mechelen Willem van,van der Beek Allard J

Abstract

ObjectiveHealth effects of different physical activity domains (ie, during leisure time, work and transport) are generally considered positive. UsingActive Worker consortiumdata, we assessed independent associations of occupational and leisure-time physical activity (OPA and LTPA) with all-cause mortality.DesignTwo-stage individual participant data meta-analysis.Data sourcePublished and unpublished cohort study data.Eligibility criteriaWorking participants aged 18–65 years.MethodsAfter data harmonisation, we assessed associations of OPA and LTPA with all-cause mortality. In stage 1, we analysed data from each study separately using Cox survival regression, and in stage 2, we pooled individual study findings with random-effects modelling.ResultsIn 22 studies with up to 590 497 participants from 11 countries, during a mean follow-up of 23.1 (SD: 6.8) years, 99 743 (16%) participants died. Adjusted for LTPA, body mass index, age, smoking and education level, summary (ie, stage 2) hazard ration (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for low, moderate and high OPA among men (n=2 96 134) were 1.01 (0.99 to 1.03), 1.05 (1.01 to 1.10) and 1.12 (1.03 to 1.23), respectively. For women (n=2 94 364), HRs (95% CI) were 0.98 (0.92 to 1.04), 0.96 (0.92 to 1.00) and 0.97 (0.86 to 1.10), respectively. In contrast, higher levels of LTPA were inversely associated with mortality for both genders. For example, for women HR for low, moderate and high compared with sedentary LTPA were 0.85 (0.81 to 0.89), 0.78 (0.74 to 0.81) and 0.75 (0.65 to 0.88), respectively. Effects were attenuated when adjusting for income (although data on income were available from only 9 and 6 studies, for men and women, respectively).ConclusionOur findings indicate that OPA may not result in the same beneficial health effects as LTPA.

Funder

Ministry of Economics, Science and Digitization of Saxony-Anhalt

Ministry of Education

The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development; ZonMw

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Swedish Research Council

Federal Employment Office

Wilhelm-Roux-Programme of the Martin-Luther-University of Halle-Wittenberg

State of Bavaria

BMBF

Publisher

BMJ

Reference73 articles.

1. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy

2. Sallis JF , Owen N , Fisher EB . Ecological models of health behavior. In: Glanz K , Rimer BK , Viswanath K , eds. Health behavior and health education: theory, research, and practice. 4th edn. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2008: 465–82.

3. World Health Organization . WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2020.

4. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour

5. The physical activity paradox: six reasons why occupational physical activity (OPA) does not confer the cardiovascular health benefits that leisure time physical activity does

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3