Displacing Sedentary Behaviour with Light Intensity Physical Activity Spontaneously Alters Habitual Macronutrient Intake and Enhances Dietary Quality in Older Females

Abstract

Displacing Sedentary Behaviour (SB) with light intensity physical activity (LIPA) is increasingly viewed as a viable means of health enhancement. It is, however, unclear whether any behavioural compensations accompany such an intervention. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify any dietary changes that accompany SB displacement. We hypothesised that SB displacement would improve dietary quality. Thirty-five elderly females (73 ± 5 years) were randomly allocated to one of three groups: (1) sedentary behaviour fragmentation (SBF) (n = 14), (2) continuous LIPA (n = 14), or (3) control (n = 7). Habitual diet (four-day food diary) and physical behaviour (accelerometery) were assessed at weeks 0 and 8. Out of 45 nutrients examined, only glucose exhibited a group × time interaction (p = 0.03), mediated by an exclusive reduction following SBF (−31%). SBF was also the sole experimental group to increase nutrients promoting bone health (SBF: 17%, LIPA: −34%. control: 21%), whereas both experimental groups consumed more nutrients promoting anabolism (SBF: 13%, LIPA: 4%, control: −34%) (z-scores). New ambulators (n = 8) also consumed more nutrients promoting bone health (16%)/anabolism (2%) (z-scores), including significantly increased Zinc intake (p = 0.05, 29%). Displacing SB with LIPA improves dietary quality in older females. Furthermore, SB fragmentation appears advantageous for various dietary outcomes.

The Effects of Exercise on Appetite in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Title and abstract evaluation identified 79 potential manuscripts for full text screening. After screening full articles, 19 reports met all inclusion criteria (46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59)(60)(61)(62)(63)(64). One additional article was identified via hand searching (65).…”

“…Reports with duplicate data from included studies were retained, however, five studies which could not be interpreted without further detail were eliminated (59,60,(62)(63)(64). Ultimately, 13 unique studies were represented by 15 reports and were included in analyses (46)(47)(48)(49)(50)(51)(52)(53)(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59)61 (61). The results of the literature search and study selection are reported as a PRISMA flow diagram in Figure 1 (37).…”

“…All identified studies were randomized controlled trials (RCT), apart from one quasirandomized control trial (54,61) and one counterbalanced crossover study (51). A single study implemented an acute exercise bout ( 51 (48,50,(52)(53)(54)61)]. In three studies, participants were specifically instructed to maintain their normal diets (47,48,65).…”

“…More than one exercise intervention group was described in four reports (49,50,57,58). As previously illustrated in the method, the intervention groups in each of these articles were merged into four respective combined groups; this resulted in a single exercising intervention group and a single control Only 3 manuscripts provided change scores (48,51,53), while no studies provided a correlation coefficient (r value) in the absence of a change score.…”

“…As previously illustrated in the method, the intervention groups in each of these articles were merged into four respective combined groups; this resulted in a single exercising intervention group and a single control Only 3 manuscripts provided change scores (48,51,53), while no studies provided a correlation coefficient (r value) in the absence of a change score. As such, an estimated r value of 0.5 was used to calculate change scores for 11 studies (46,47,49,50,52,(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)65). Because of the small number of available change scores, no sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the effects of either the estimated data or imputed r value.…”