Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2018 Jan 26;10(2):125.
doi: 10.3390/nu10020125.

Interrupting Prolonged Sitting with Regular Activity Breaks does not Acutely Influence Appetite: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Evelyn M Mete  1 , Tracy L Perry  2 , Jillian J Haszard  3 , Ashleigh R Homer  4 , Stephen P Fenemor  5 , Nancy J Rehrer  6 , C Murray Skeaff  7 , Meredith C Peddie  8
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Interrupting Prolonged Sitting with Regular Activity Breaks does not Acutely Influence Appetite: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Evelyn M Mete et al. Nutrients. .

Abstract

Regular activity breaks increase energy expenditure; however, this may promote compensatory eating behaviour. The present study compared the effects of regular activity breaks and prolonged sitting on appetite. In a randomised, cross-over trial, 36 healthy adults (BMI (Body Mass Index) 23.9 kg/m² (S.D. = 3.9)) completed four, two-day interventions: two with prolonged sitting (SIT), and two with sitting and 2 min of walking every 30 min (RAB). Standardized meals were provided throughout the intervention, with an ad libitum meal at the end of Day 2. Appetite and satiety were assessed throughout both days of each intervention using five visual analogue scales. The five responses were combined into a single appetite response at each time point. The area under the appetite response curve (AUC) was calculated for each day. Intervention effects for appetite response AUC and ad libitum meal intake were tested using linear mixed models. Appetite AUC did not differ between interventions (standardised effect of RAB compared to SIT: Day 1: 0.11; 95% CI: -0.28, 0.06; p = 0.212; Day 2: 0.04; 95% CI: -0.15, 0.24; p = 0.648). There was no significant difference in energy consumed at the ad libitum lunch meal on Day 2 between RAB and SIT. Interrupting prolonged sitting with regular activity breaks does not acutely influence appetite or volume of food consumed, despite inferred increases in energy expenditure. Longer-term investigation into the effects of regular activity breaks on energy balance is warranted.

Keywords: appetite; randomized controlled trial; regular activity breaks; sedentary.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Timing of activities, meals, and questionnaires on Days 1 and 2 of each intervention. RAB: regular activity breaks; RAB+PA: regular activity breaks with physical activity; SIT: prolonged sitting; SIT+PA: prolonged sitting with physical activity.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Consort diagram.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average appetite scores for Days 1 and 2 of each intervention.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sedentary Behaviour Research Network Letter to the editor: Standardized use of the terms “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviours”. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2012;37:540–542. - PubMed
    1. Biswas A., Oh P.I., Faulkner G.E., Bajaj R.R., Silver M.A., Mitchell M.S., Alter D.A. 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;162:123–132. doi: 10.7326/M14-1651. - DOI - PubMed
    1. De Rezende L.F., Rodrigues Lopes M., Rey-Lopez J.P., Matsudo V.K., Luiz Odo C. Sedentary behavior and health outcomes: An overview of systematic reviews. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e105620. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105620. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bailey D.P., Locke C.D. Breaking up prolonged sitting with light-intensity walking improves postprandial glycemia, but breaking up sitting with standing does not. J. Sci. Med. Sport. 2015;18:294–298. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2014.03.008. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dunstan D.W., Kingwell B.A., Larsen R., Healy G.N., Cerin E., Hamilton M.T., Shaw J.E., Bertovic D.A., Zimmet P.Z., Salmon J., et al. Breaking up prolonged sitting reduces postprandial glucose and insulin responses. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:976–983. doi: 10.2337/dc11-1931. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources