Paradoxical Associations of Occupational and Nonoccupational Sedentary Behavior With Cardiovascular Disease Risk Measures in Desk Workers
- PMID: 37130827
- PMCID: PMC10330357
- DOI: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002873
Paradoxical Associations of Occupational and Nonoccupational Sedentary Behavior With Cardiovascular Disease Risk Measures in Desk Workers
Abstract
Objectives: We assessed sedentary behavior (SB) patterns and examined its associations, by domain, with cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk measures in desk workers ( N = 273).
Methods: Sedentary behavior was measured by activPAL3 and partitioned into occupational and nonoccupational SB. Cardiovascular disease risk measures included blood pressure, pulse wave velocity, heart rate, and heart rate variability. Paired t tests evaluated patterns of SB across domains. Linear regressions estimated associations of occupational and nonoccupational SB with CVD risk measures.
Results: Participants spent 69% of their time in SB; higher proportions were accumulated during occupational versus nonoccupational time. Higher all-domain SB was only associated with higher pulse wave velocity. Paradoxically, greater nonoccupational SB unfavorably associated with CVD risk measures, while higher occupational SB favorably correlated to CVD risk measures.
Conclusions: Observed paradoxical associations suggest that domain should be considered in efforts to improve cardiovascular health by reducing SB.
Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03307343.
Copyright © 2023 American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest: None declared.
Figures
References
-
- Tsao CW, Aday AW, Almarzooq ZI, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2022 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation 2022;145(8):e153–e639. - PubMed
-
- Biswas A, Oh PI, Faulkner GE, et al. Sedentary time and its association with risk for disease incidence, mortality, and hospitalization in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of internal medicine 2015;162(2):123–32. - PubMed
