Comparison of two walking strategies to promote physical activity in sedentary adults
Artículo
Open/ Download
Access note
Acceso a solo metadatos
Publication date
2020Metadata
Show full item record
Cómo citar
Otto Yáñez, Matías
Cómo citar
Comparison of two walking strategies to promote physical activity in sedentary adults
Author
Abstract
Sedentary lifestyle is the fourth risk factor worldwide. Performing 10,000 daily steps or
30 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity has been recommended by WHO to promote
physical activity in the general population and as well as in chronic respiratory diseases.
Objective: To compare the metabolic expenditure, time of moderate to vigorous physical activity
(MVPA), and the number of steps generated between two recommendations: 1) Perform 10,000 daily
steps, 2) Three fast daily walks of 10 minutes each.
Method: Sedentary youth between 18-30 years. Accelerometers ActiGraph wGT3X-BT was used to
measure metabolic expenditure. Baseline evaluation (b) was performed for five days. Intervention
measurements were randomized to avoid the learning effect. The normality test was performed with
Shapiro-Wilks and a comparison of medians with the Wilcoxon test.
Result: 15 subjects (10 women), age 23 (21-26) years, BMI 25.8 (22.6-29.7) participated. When
comparing recommendation 1 vs. 2, there were significant differences in total calories (1863 (1108-
2313) and 1699 (1012-2016) kcals; p 0.009), METs (1.13 (1.08 - 1.2) and 1.11 (1.09-1.17); p 0.018),
Total MVPA time (255.16 (147.33 - 332.33) and 202 (134.18-253.5) min; p 0.005), and total steps
(40762 (23907-48696) and 30545 (19966 - 88716) steps; p 0.015). The rest of the variables did not show
significant differences.
Conclusion: Our results suggest that sedentary adults who perform 10,000 daily steps have higher
metabolic expenditure, time in MVPA and a number of steps than adults that perform three daily walks
of 10 minutes each.
Indexation
Artículo de publicación ISI
Identifier
URI: https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/180535
DOI: 10.1183/13993003.congress-2020.266
Quote Item
European Respiratory Journal Volume: 56 Supplement: 64 Sep 2020
Collections