4.6 Article

Lifetime physical activity and the risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis

期刊

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/jnnp-2012-304724

关键词

ALS; MOTOR NEURON DISEASE

资金

  1. Prinses Beatrix Fonds [PB 0703]
  2. VSB fonds
  3. Kersten Foundation
  4. Netherlands ALS Foundation
  5. JR van Dijk
  6. Adessium Foundation
  7. European Community [259867]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background It has been hypothesised that physical activity is a risk factor for developing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), fuelled by observations that professional soccer players and Gulf War veterans are at increased risk. In a population based study, we determined the relation between physical activity and risk of sporadic ALS, using an objective approach for assessing physical activity. Methods 636 sporadic ALS patients and 2166 controls, both population based, completed a semistructured questionnaire on lifetime history of occupations, sports and hobbies. To objectively compare the energy cost of a lifetime history of occupational and leisure time physical activities and to reduce recall bias, metabolic equivalent scores were assigned to each activity based on the Compendium of Physical Activities. Results ALS patients had significantly higher levels of leisure time physical activity compared with controls (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.14, p=0.008). No significant difference was found between patients and controls in the level of vigorous physical activities, including marathons and triathlons, or in occupational activity. Cumulative measures of physical activity in quartiles did not show a dose-response relationship. Conclusions An increased risk of ALS with higher levels of leisure time physical activity was found in the present study. The lack of association with occupational physical activity and the absence of a dose-response relationship strengthen the hypothesis that not increased physical activity per se but rather a genetic profile or lifestyle promoting physical fitness increases ALS susceptibility.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据