4.3 Article

Association of Habitual Physical Activity With Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Target Organ Damage in Adolescents and Young Adults

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY & HEALTH
卷 15, 期 3, 页码 176-182

出版社

HUMAN KINETICS PUBL INC
DOI: 10.1123/jpah.2017-0276

关键词

accelerometry; IPAQ; arterial stiffness; diastolic dysfunction; strain

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health (National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute) [R01 HL076269, R01 HL105591]
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1 TR001425]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: We aimed to (1) compare a subjective and objective measure of habitual physical activity (PA), (2) determine the association of PA and cardiovascular risk factors, and (3) test the hypothesis that PA is an independent determinant of target organ damage in youth. Methods: Cross-sectional analysis of youth with and without type 2 diabetes [mean age = 22 (3.9) y]. PA was measured with International Physical Activity Questionnaire and Actical accelerometer. Target organ damage was assessed with echocardiography and peripheral arterial testing. Subjects were stratified into tertiles of total PA, and differences were tested by analysis of variance and. 2 tests. General linear models tested for independent associations. Results: The correlation between International Physical Activity Questionnaire and accelerometry was weak (r=.23, P=.0003). Less active subjects had worse cardiovascular risk profiles and target organ damage, including stiffer arteries (P<.01). These outcome differences did not reach statistical significance when adjusted for covariates, such as lipid levels and glycemic control. Conclusion: Survey assessment of PA is complicated by inaccurate reporting. There is a strong association of habitual PA with cardiovascular risk factor clustering. PA may exert its beneficial effect on arterial stiffness in obese youth through improved glycemic control.

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

4.3
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