4.7 Article

Role of physical activity and fitness on sleep in sedentary middle-aged adults: the FIT-AGEING study

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-79355-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Education [FPU14/04172, FPU16/01093]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that reducing sedentariness, increasing physical activity and fitness were positively associated with improved sleep quantity and quality, suggesting a potential pathway for preventing and treating sleep disturbances and improving overall physical and psychological health in patients for successful aging.
The association of physical activity and fitness with sleep still remains unclear since there is a lack of studies in this field of research using objective measurements of these variables. This study aimed to investigate the association of objectively-measured sedentariness, physical activity levels, and physical fitness with sleep quantity and quality in sedentary middle-aged adults. A total of 74 volunteers (52.7% women; aged 53.7 +/- 5.1) were recruited for the present study. Cardiorespiratory fitness was measured through a maximal treadmill test, and muscular strength by extension and flexion peak torque, and by the hand grip test. Physical activity and objective sleep parameters were determined through accelerometry, and subjective sleep by the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Reduced levels of sedentariness, greater VO2max, and greater muscular strength were positively related to improved objective sleep quantity and quality (all P <= 0.05). Furthermore, higher levels of overall physical activity, VO2max, and muscular strength were related to better subjective sleep quantity and quality (all P <= 0.05). Reduced sedentariness and increased physical activity and fitness may be a potential prevention and/or treatment pathway to reduce sleep disturbances and, in general, to improve patients physical and psychological health for a successful aging process.

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

4.7
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