The importance of an integrative view of behaviors adopted during the 24 hours of the day in physical activity and exercise interventions studies

A importância de uma visão integrativa dos comportamentos adotados nas 24 horas do dia em estudos de intervenção com atividade física e exercício

Abstract

Given the reduced proportion of the 24 hours of the day spent with moderate to vigorous physical activities, there has been a recent appreciation of integrative and compositional approaches of the different behaviors adopted throughout the day for interpretations of health outcomes. This study points out the importance of integrating sleep time, sedentary behavior and physical activities of different intensities in the interpretation of results of physical activity and exercise interventions. We believe that this is a crucial strategy for better understanding the effects of interventions as well as for scientific progress in the area.

Key words
Exercise; Physical education and training; Sedentary lifestyle

Resumo

Considerando a reduzida proporção das 24 horas do dia ocupada com atividades físicas de intensidade moderada ou vigorosas, há uma valorização recente de abordagens integrativas e composicionais dos diferentes comportamentos adotados ao longo do dia para as interpretações de desfechos em saúde. Aqui chamamos a atenção para a importância da integração do tempo de sono, do tempo em comportamento sedentário e de atividades físicas de diferentes intensidades na interpretação de resultados de intervenções em atividade física e exercício. Acreditamos ser essa uma estratégia crucial para o melhor entendimento dos efeitos das intervenções, bem como para o progresso científico da área.

Palavras-chave
Educação física e treinamento; Estilo de vida sedentário; Exercício

INTRODUCTION

Physical activity and physical exercise are established as important strategies for health promotion, prevention and treatment of various diseases. The benefits of regular moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) or participation in physical exercise programs are more than evident in literature, so the current challenge seems to be to develop effective strategies to ensure adherence of different population subgroups to PA practice. In addition, in recent years, the role of sedentary behavior on health has also been highlighted¹. Long and uninterrupted periods of time in activities with energy expenditure ≤1.5 METs - in a sitting, reclining or lying position during the waking period - are associated with negative outcomes in several organic systems². Interestingly, although still controversial, the effects of some types of sedentary behaviors seem to be independent of the practice of MVPA or of participation in physical exercise programs³.

Considering that most of the waking period is occupied with sedentary activities, recent evidence associated with the sedentary behavior paradigm has raised the concern with behaviors adopted and activities performed in the 24 hours of the day²,⁴. Thus, compliance with international recommendations of physical activity or guidelines for physical exercise prescription became a necessary condition, but insufficient for the understanding of many of the effects attributed to MVPA and physical exercise. As an example, a physical training program run three times a week, lasting 60 minutes per session, would account for only 2% of a person’s week. Thus, the lack of control of physical activity and sedentary behavior during periods of exercise intervention could explain many curious results or even unexpected results.

INTEGRATION OF SLEEP TIME, SEDENTARY BEHAVIOR AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

This new perception of the compositional and integrative nature of behaviors adopted during the day has also increased the concern with other domains of life. Although the main focus of studies in this area is the leisure or commuting domain (in the case of physical activity), an increase in the interest in work and domestic activities has been observed. In these latter domains, despite initiatives linked to MVPA, the main intervention model has been the reduction and interruption of sedentary behavior, mainly by the substitution by light intensity physical activities. We have recently followed the boom of studies on standing desks to reduce/interrupt sitting time⁵, in addition to interventions focused on changes in family habits⁶ and in the sedentary behavior of older adults⁷.

Still with regard to 24-h day limitation, for the monitoring of patterns of physical activities of different intensities and sedentary behavior, the sleep time should necessarily be estimated (which is not classified as sedentary behavior). Thus, a third behavior associated to health outcomes (especially dependent and confounding variables) is characterized, but it is still poorly controlled in physical activity or exercise intervention studies. As an example, especially from the diffusion of electronic equipment (e.g., cell phones, tablets and personal computers), we have seen that much of the sleep time has been replaced by screen-based sedentary behavior. Given the above, a doubly negative situation is observed, which could, in different ways, influence the results obtained with specific interventions⁸. These trends represent a possible new direction necessary for physical activity and exercise intervention studies.

The importance of controlling the behaviors adopted during the 24 hours of the day in physical activity and exercise intervention studies goes beyond the possible confusion generated in the evaluated outcomes. A relatively recent area of study has identified possible compensatory and synergistic effects of adherence to exercise programs or increased level of physical activity in specific domains of the day⁹. In other words, being more active in a particular domain of life (e.g., leisure) may favor the adoption of more active habits (synergistic effect caused by the benefits of physical activity) or less active (compensatory effect of fatigue caused by the activity) in other domains. Thus, it is plausible to assume that the involvement of people with lower functional status (sedentary, obese or elderly) in physical exercise programs improves their functional performance so that their ability to perform domestic tasks or active movements is increased, on the other, training with higher overloads could induce longer sedentary time during the day. In terms of public health, it is also worth identifying which is the dose of physical activity that in addition to optimizing adherence, causes smaller compensatory effects. It is also possible that different types of physical exercise have specific compensatory and synergistic effects. However, the literature is scarce and controversial in this regard¹²,¹³. These effects not controlled by the majority of studies can even vary between subjects, time and mediate / moderate the results of interventions¹⁴,¹⁵.

FINAL COMMENTS

In this way, we emphasize the importance of adopting methods that help control the behaviors adopted in the 24 hours of the day, such as accelerometers and inclinometers, in interventions with physical activity and exercise. This seems to be an important step towards the advancement of scientific knowledge in the area of Physical Education. In this context, subareas associated with physical and sports training, which have sought to understand in an increasingly detailed way the effects of exercise protocols on multifactorial outcomes, are potentially leaving out valuable information for a better understanding and discussion of their results. Finally, we pose a question for reflection: do we really evaluate the effect of our interventions?

How to cite this article

• Silva DRP, Ohara D, Silva-Grigoletto ME. The importance of an integrative view of behaviors adopted during the 24 hours of the day in physical activity and exercise interventions studies. Rev Bras Cineantropom Desempenho Hum 2019, 21:e56712. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1980-0037.2019v21e56712.

COMPLIANCE WITH ETHICAL STANDARDS

• Funding
  This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-profit sectors. This study was funded by the authors.
• Ethical approval
  This article did not use data collected from humans and represents a scientific opinion of literature.

REFERENCES

• ¹
  Biswas A, Oh PI, Faulkner GE, Bajaj RR, Silver MA, Mitchell MS, et al. Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2015;162(2):123-32.
• ²
  Hamilton MT. The role of skeletal muscle contractile duration throughout the whole day: reducing sedentary time and promoting universal physical activity in all people. J Physiol 2017; 596(8):1331-40.
• ³
  Ekelund U, Steene-Johannessen J, Brown WJ, Fagerland MW, Owen N, Powell KE, et al. Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women. Lancet 2016;388(10051):1302-10.
• ⁴
  Pedišić Ž, Dumuid D, Olds TS. Integratingsleep, sedentary behaviour, and physical activity research in the emergingfield of time-use epidemiology: definitions, concepts, statistical methods,theoretical framework, and future directions. Kinesiology 2017;49(2):1-18.
• ⁵
  MacEwen BT, MacDonald DJ, Burr JF. A systematic review of standing and treadmill desks in the workplace. Prev Med 2015;70:50-8.
• ⁶
  86. Marsh S, Foley LS, Wilks DC, Maddison R. Family-based interventions for reducing sedentary time in youth: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Obes Rev 2014;15(2):117-33.
• ⁷
  Dogra S, Ashe MC, Biddle SJH, Brown WJ, Buman MP, Chastin S, et al. Sedentary time in older men and women: an international consensus statement and research priorities. Br J Sports Med. 2017; 51(21):1526-32.
• ⁸
  Barlett ND, Gentile DA, Barlett CP, Eisenmann JC, Walsh DA. Sleep as a Mediator of Screen Time Effects on US Children's Health Outcomes. J Child Media 2012;6(1):37-50.
• ⁹
  Gomersall SR, Rowlands AV, English C, Maher C, Olds TS. The ActivityStat hypothesis: the concept, the evidence and the methodologies. Sports Med 2013;43(2):135-49.
• ¹⁰
  Siddique J, de Chavez PJ, Craft LL, Freedson P, Spring B. The Effect of Changes in Physical Activity on Sedentary Behavior: Results From a Randomized Lifestyle Intervention Trial. Am J Health Promot 2017;31(4):287-95.
• ¹¹
  Di Blasio A, Ripari P, Bucci I, Di Donato F, Izzicupo P, D'Angelo E, et al. Walking training in postmenopause: effects on both spontaneous physical activity and traininginduced body adaptations. Menopause 2012;19(1):23-32.
• ¹²
  Drenowatz C, Grieve GL, DeMello MM. Change in energy expenditure and physical activity in response to aerobic and resistance exercise programs. Springerplus 2015;4:798.
• ¹³
  Castro EA, Judice PB, Silva AM, Teixeira PJ, Benito PJ. Sedentary behavior and compensatory mechanisms in response to different doses of exercise-a randomized controlled trial in overweight and obese adults. Eur J Clin Nutr 2017;71(12):1393-8.
• ¹⁴
  Kozey-Keadle S, Staudenmayer J, Libertine A, Mavilia M, Lyden K, Braun B, et al. Changes in sedentary time and physical activity in response to an exercise training and/or lifestyle intervention. J Phys Act Health 2014;11(7):1324-33.
• ¹⁵
  Jindo T, Kitano N, Tsunoda K, Kusuda M, Hotta K, Okura T. Daily Life Physical Activity Modulates the Effects of an Exercise Program on Lower-Extremity Physical Function in Japanese Older Adults. J Geriatr Phys Ther 2017;40(3):150-7.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  30 May 2019
• Date of issue
  2019

History

• Received
  22 Apr 2018
• Accepted
  12 Nov 2018