Explore the vast range of titles available.

Parents influence the physical activity and sedentary behaviour of their children. This analysis examines associations between parental role modeling and support and children's physical activity and sedentary behaviour. The sample consists of 1,328 biological parent-child pairs from the first three cycles of the Canadian Health Measures Survey (2007 through 2013). Data on physical activity and sedentary behaviour were collected using a questionnaire and by accelerometer. Pearson correlation and linear regression analyses were completed to examine associations between parents' and children's measured physical activity and sedentary time and reported screen-based activities. Analyses were adjusted for variables indicating parental support and household lifestyle characteristics. Accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary time were correlated in all parent-child pairs. Parents' measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) was associated with children's MVPA (ß = 0.28, p < 0.001). For every 20-minute increase in a parent's MVPA, the child's MVPA increased by 5 to 10 minutes. Parents' measured sedentary time was associated with that of their daughters on weekends, and with that of their sons during the after-school period. Parents' reported screen time was associated with that of their daughters. This study confirms parents' influence on their children's physical activity. Parental role modeling and support have independent effects on a child's level of physical activity.

Rising obesity rates and declining fitness levels have increased interest in understanding what underlies these trends. This article presents the first directly measured data on physical activity and sedentary behaviour on a nationally representative sample of Canadians aged 20 to 79 years. Data are from the 2007 to 2009 Canadian Health Measures Survey (CHMS). Physical activity was measured using accelerometry. Data are presented as time spent in sedentary, light, moderate and vigorous intensity movement as well as steps accumulated per day. An estimated 15% of Canadian adults accumulate 150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) per week; 5% accumulate 150 minutes per week as at least 30 minutes of MVPA on 5 or more days a week. Men are more active than women and MVPA declines with increasing age and adiposity. Canadian adults are sedentary for approximately 9.5 hours per day (69% of waking hours). Men accumulate an average of 9,500 steps per day and women, 8,400 steps per day. The 10,000-steps-per-day target is achieved by 35% of adults. Before the CHMS, objective measures of physical activity and sedentary behaviour were not available for a representative sample of Canadians. The findings indicate that 85% of adults are not active enough to meet Canada's new physical activity recommendation.

Background Individuals with knee and hip osteoarthritis (OA) are less physically active than people in general, and many of these individuals have adopted a sedentary lifestyle. In this study we evaluate the outcome of education and supervised exercise on the level of physical activity in individuals with knee or hip OA. We also evaluate the effect on pain, quality of life and self-efficacy. Methods Of the 264 included individuals with knee or hip OA, 195 were allocated to the intervention group. The intervention group received education and supervised exercise that comprised information delivered by a physiotherapist and individually adapted exercises. The reference group consisted of 69 individuals with knee or hip OA awaiting joint replacement and receiving standard care. The primary outcome was physical activity (as measured with an accelerometer). The secondary outcomes were pain (Visual Analog Scale), quality of life (EQ-5D), and self-efficacy (Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale, pain and other symptoms subscales). Participants in both groups were evaluated at baseline and after 3 months. The intervention group was also evaluated after 12 months. Results No differences were found in the number of minutes spent in sedentary or in physical activity between the intervention and reference groups when comparing the baseline and 3 month follow-up. However, there was a significant difference in mean change (mean diff; 95% CI; significance) between the intervention group and reference group favoring the intervention group with regard to pain (13; 7 to 19; p  < 0.001), quality of life (− 0.17; − 0.24 to − 0.10; p  < 0.001), self-efficacy/other symptoms (− 5; − 10 to − 0.3; p  < 0.04), and self-efficacy/pain (− 7; − 13 to − 2; p  < 0.01). Improvements in pain and quality of life in the intervention group persisted at the 12-month follow-up. Conclusions Participation in an education and exercise program following the Swedish BOA program neither decreased the average amount of sedentary time nor increased the level of physical activity. However, participation in such a program resulted in decreased pain, increased quality of life, and increased self-efficacy. Trial registration The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: NCT02022566 . Retrospectively registered 12/18/2013.

The effectiveness of exercise training for preventing excessive gestational weight gain (GWG) and gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is still uncertain. As maternal obesity is associated with both GWG and GDM, there is a special need to assess whether prenatal exercise training programs provided to obese women reduce the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Our primary aim was to assess whether regular supervised exercise training in pregnancy could reduce GWG in women with prepregnancy overweight/obesity. Secondary aims were to examine the effects of exercise in pregnancy on 30 outcomes including GDM incidence, blood pressure, blood measurements, skinfold thickness, and body composition. This was a single-center study where we randomized (1:1) 91 pregnant women with a prepregnancy body mass index (BMI) ≥ 28 kg/m2 to exercise training (n = 46) or control (standard maternity care) (n = 45). Assessments were done at baseline (pregnancy week 12-18) and in late pregnancy (week 34-37), as well as at delivery. The exercise group was offered thrice weekly supervised sessions of 35 min of moderate intensity endurance exercise and 25 min of strength training. Seventeen women were lost to follow-up (eight in the exercise group and nine in the control group). Our primary endpoint was GWG from baseline testing to delivery. The principal analyses were done as intention-to-treat analyses, with supplementary per protocol analyses where we assessed outcomes in the women who adhered to the exercise program (n = 19) compared to the control group. Mean GWG from baseline to delivery was 10.5 kg in the exercise group and 9.2 kg in the control group, with a mean difference of 0.92 kg (95% CI -1.35, 3.18; p = 0.43). Among the 30 secondary outcomes in late pregnancy, an apparent reduction was recorded in the incidence of GDM (2009 WHO definition) in the exercise group (2 cases; 6.1%) compared to the control group (9 cases; 27.3%), with an odds ratio of 0.1 (95% CI 0.02, 0.95; p = 0.04). Systolic blood pressure was significantly lower in the exercise group (mean 120.4 mm Hg) compared to the control group (mean 128.1 mm Hg), with a mean difference of -7.73 mm Hg (95% CI -13.23, -2.22; p = 0.006). No significant between-group differences were seen in diastolic blood pressure, blood measurements, skinfold thickness, or body composition in late pregnancy. In per protocol analyses, late pregnancy systolic blood pressure was 115.7 (95% CI 110.0, 121.5) mm Hg in the exercise group (significant between-group difference, p = 0.001), and diastolic blood pressure was 75.1 (95% CI 71.6, 78.7) mm Hg (significant between-group difference, p = 0.02). We had planned to recruit 150 women into the trial; hence, under-recruitment represents a major limitation of our results. Another limitation to our study was the low adherence to the exercise program, with only 50% of the women included in the intention-to-treat analysis adhering as described in the study protocol. In this trial we did not observe a reduction in GWG among overweight/obese women who received a supervised exercise training program during their pregnancy. The incidence of GDM in late pregnancy seemed to be lower in the women randomized to exercise training than in the women receiving standard maternity care only. Systolic blood pressure in late pregnancy was also apparently lower in the exercise group than in the control group. These results indicate that supervised exercise training might be beneficial as a part of standard pregnancy care for overweight/obese women. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01243554.

Optical measurement techniques and recent advances in wearable technology have made heart rate (HR) sensing simpler and more affordable. The Polar OH1 is an arm worn optical heart rate monitor. The objectives of this study are two-fold; 1) to validate the OH1 optical HR sensor with the gold standard of HR measurement, electrocardiography (ECG), over a range of moderate to high intensity physical activities, 2) to validate wearing the OH1 at the temple as an alternative location to its recommended wearing location around the forearm and upper arm. Twenty-four individuals participated in a physical exercise protocol, by walking on a treadmill and riding a stationary spin bike at different speeds while the criterion measure, ECG and Polar OH1 HR were recorded simultaneously at three different body locations; forearm, upper arm and the temple. Time synchronised HR data points were compared using Bland-Altman analyses and intraclass correlation. The intraclass correlation between the ECG and Polar OH1, for the aggregated data, was 0.99 and the estimated mean bias ranged 0.27-0.33 bpm for the sensor locations. The three sensors exhibited a 95% limit of agreement (LoA: forearm 5.22, -4.68 bpm; upper arm 5.15, -4.49; temple 5.22, -4.66). The mean of the ECG HR for the aggregated data was 112.15 ± 24.52 bpm. The intraclass correlation of HR values below and above this mean were 0.98 and 0.99 respectively. The reported mean bias ranged 0.38-0.47 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 6.14, -5.38 bpm; upper arm 6.07, -5.13 bpm; temple 6.09, -5.31 bpm), and 0.15-0.16 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 3.99, -3.69 bpm; upper arm 3.90, -3.58 bpm; temple 4.06, -3.76 bpm) respectively. During different exercise intensities, the intraclass correlation ranged 0.95-0.99 for the three sensor locations. During the entire protocol, the estimated mean bias was in the range -0.15-0.55 bpm, 0.01-0.53 bpm and -0.37-0.48 bpm, for the forearm, upper arm and temple locations respectively. The corresponding upper limits of 95% LoA were 3.22-7.03 bpm, 3.25-6.82 bpm and 3.18-7.04 bpm while the lower limits of 95% LoA were -6.36-(-2.35) bpm, -6.46-(-2.30) bpm and -7.42-(-2.41) bpm. Polar OH1 demonstrates high level of agreement with the criterion measure ECG HR, thus can be used as a valid measure of HR in lab and field settings during moderate and high intensity physical activities.

Exercise therapy is the most common approach for people with chronic neck pain (CNP). Although well‐established, it remains unknown which type of exercise is the best for treating this condition. Moreover, pain processing can play a role in the persistence of pain and in the response to interventions. Thus, the aim of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the acute and long‐term effects of two exercise protocols (specific and non‐specific) on pain and pain processing in individuals with CNP. One hundred and ten participants aged between 18 and 65 years who have had non‐specific neck pain for more than 3 months will be recruited. They will be randomized and allocated into two groups (specific exercises and non‐specific exercises) and both groups will perform an exercise programme twice a week for 8 weeks. Both programmes are divided into two progressive and individualized phases. The primary outcomes are change in pain intensity after 8 weeks of exercise and exercise‐induced hypoalgesia, and secondary outcomes are pressure pain threshold, temporal summation of pain, conditioned pain modulation, the Neck Disability Index, the Baecke Physical Activity Questionnaire, and the Global Perception of Change Scale. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, after 8 weeks of intervention, and at 6‐month follow‐up. What is the central question of this study? Chronic neck pain is the second‐most disabling musculoskeletal condition: how do the acute and long‐term effects of specific and non‐specific exercises for chronic neck pain compare? What is the importance of this work? This is the first randomized controlled trial to compare the effects of acute and long‐term effects of specific and non‐specific exercises on pain intensity and pain processing in chronic neck pain.