Where Does the Time Go? Displacement of Device-Measured Sedentary Time in Effective Sedentary Behaviour Interventions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background Research has shown the effectiveness of sedentary behaviour interventions on reducing sedentary time. However, no systematic review has studied where the reduced sedentary time after such interventions is displaced to. Objective Our objective was to synthesize the evidence from interventions that have reduced sedentary behaviour and test the displacement of sedentary time into physical activity (light physical activity [LPA], moderate-to-vigorous physical activity [MVPA], standing, and stepping). Methods Two independent researchers performed a systematic search of the EBSCOhost, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic databases. Meta-analyses were performed to examine the time reallocated from sedentary behaviour to physical activity during working time and the whole day in intervention trials (randomized/non-randomized controlled/ non-controlled). Results A total of 36 studies met all the eligibility criteria and were included in the systematic review, with 26 studies included in the meta-analysis. Interventions showed a significant overall increase in worksite LPA (effect size [ES] 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05 to 0.43; P < 0.013) and daily LPA (ES 0.62; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91; P = 0.001). A statistically significant increase in daily MVPA was observed (ES 0.47; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.67; P < 0.001). There was a significant overall increase in worksite standing time (ES 0.76; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; P < 0.001), daily standing time (ES 0.52; 95% CI 0.38 to 0.65; P < 0.001), and worksite stepping time (ES 0.12; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.20; P = 0.002). Conclusions Effective interventions aimed at reducing sedentary behaviour result in a consistent displacement of sedentary time to LPA and standing time, both at worksites and across the whole day, whereas changes in stepping time or MVPA are dependent on the intervention setting. Strategies to reduce sedentary behaviour should not be limited to worksite settings, and further efforts may be required to promote daily MVPA. Trial Registration PROSPERO registration number CRD42020153958.

The Effect of Sedentary Behaviour on Cardiorespiratory Fitness: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Only the two exercise groups achieved a significant improvement in CRF, possibly suggesting that the addition of exercise MVPA (above incidental physical activity) was likely responsible for the positive changes in CRF. However, these findings and those of our review suggest that SB interventions, which likely have less of an effect on MVPA [ 110 ], can maintain and in some cases improve CRF. This is an important finding given the known age-related declines in adult CRF [ 59 , 111 , 112 ], suggesting that incidental/lower intensity physical activity may be sufficient to maintain, but not improve, CRF.…”

Substituting device-measured sedentary time with alternative 24-hour movement behaviours: compositional associations with adiposity and cardiometabolic risk in the ORISCAV-LUX 2 study

“…We suggest that light PA and MVPA should feature together in public health policies and interventions that are designed to optimise cardiometabolic health. This approach is also pragmatic, since effective interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour show a consistent displacement of sedentary time to light PA, while changes in MVPA are setting-specific and difficult to achieve [ 61 ]. Although the magnitudes of some of our associations may appear to be small, the cumulative cardiometabolic effects of replacing sedentary time with alternative behaviours could be influential, as they appear to translate to reduced incidence of cardiovascular disease [ 62 ].…”

Combined effect of sedentary behavior and physical activity of different intensity on cardiovascular health

“…Следовательно, хотя замена СП ходьбой и УИФА связана с самым низким риском смерти, замена равного количества стояния и сна у тех, кто плохо спит, также связана со значительным снижением риска смерти. Сходные результаты были получены в когортном исследовании [43] и обзоре [44], подтвердившим положительные факты смещения сокращенного времени СП на значительное общее увеличение продолжительности НИФА на рабочем месте (р<0,013) и дневной УИФА у взрослых (р<0,001).…”