4.6 Article

Reducing the impact of physical inactivity: evidence to support the case for targeting people with chronic mental and physical conditions

Journal

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Volume 38, Issue 2, Pages 343-351

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdv036

Keywords

chronic disease; physical activity; physical inactivity

Funding

  1. National Institute for Health Research, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care, Yorkshire and Humber (NIHR CLAHRC YH)
  2. University of Sheffield

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent evidence suggests that small increases in the physical activity of those considered least active can have a bigger health impact than raising levels of those already achieving or close to achieving recommendations. Profiling the characteristics of those who are least active allows for appropriate targeting of interventions. This study therefore examined the characteristics of people in the lowest physical activity bracket. Data were taken from the Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) funded 'South Yorkshire Cohort', a longitudinal observational dataset of residents of South Yorkshire, England. Five separate outcomes based on a shortened version of the GPPAQ were used to represent the lowest levels of physical activity. Potential predictors examined were age, sex, body mass index, ethnicity, chronic conditions, current employment and deprivation. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were conducted. Individuals with chronic mental and physical conditions (fatigue, insomnia, anxiety, depression, diabetes, breathing problems, high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke and cancer) were more likely to report the lowest levels of physical activity across all five outcomes. Demographic variations were also observed. Targeting people with chronic mental and physical conditions has the potential to reduce the impact of physical inactivity.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available