In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.


This content is currently on FREE ACCESS, enjoy another 16 days of free consultation

 

Effects of active commuting on exercise capacity, cardiovascular risk, body composition and quality of life: results of a randomized-controlled study

Session Poster Session 2

Speaker David Niederseer

Congress : EuroPrevent 2019

  • Topic : preventive cardiology
  • Sub-topic : Physical Inactivity and Exercise
  • Session type : Poster Session
  • FP Number : P445

Authors : VA Rossi (Zurich,CH), B Reich (Salzburg,AT), MD Fernandez Lapuente De Battre (Salzburg,AT), P Stutz (Salzburg,AT), B Zagel (Salzburg,AT), M Loidl (Salzburg,AT), CM Schmied (Zurich,CH), J Niebauer (Salzburg,AT), D Niederseer (Zurich,CH)

15 views

Authors:
VA Rossi1 , B Reich2 , MD Fernandez Lapuente De Battre2 , P Stutz3 , B Zagel3 , M Loidl3 , CM Schmied1 , J Niebauer2 , D Niederseer1 , 1University Hospital Zurich, Department of Cardiology - Zurich - Switzerland , 2Paracelsus Private Medical University - Salzburg - Austria , 3University of Salzburg, Z_GIS - Salzburg - Austria ,

On behalf: GISMO (Geographical Information Support for Healthy Mobility)

Citation:

Background:

Sedentary lifestyle is a major modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular diseases and triggers substantial costs due to early retirement and the inability to participate in the work force. Active commuting has been proposed to at least in part overcome these problems; however, convincing data to support this recommendation are sparse.

Purpose:
To investigate the health effects of active commuting.

Methods: 73 subjects (age: 46±9 years, 38% males) were 2:1 randomized to an intervention group (IG, n=51) or control group (CG, n=22). Depending on the distance to the work place, IG participants either traveled by a combination of public transport and walking and/or cycling (n=25), or they commuted by walking and/or cycling only (n=26). The CG was asked to commute as usual. Exercise capacity, body composition, everyday physical activity, quality of life, and cardiovascular risk factors were assessed at baseline and after a study period of one year.

Results: Groups did not differ significantly at baseline. Daily self-reported commuting details were verified by GPS-tracking.  Subjects randomized to IG changed their commuting habits, whereas CG did not (%time of commuting: IG: walking/cycling/public transport: 93%, car: 7%, CG: walking/cycling/public transport: 54%, car: 46%, p<0.001). Time to commute did not differ significantly. Percentage of age-predicted exercise capacity (IG: 145±25 to 155±31, p<0.001; CG: 142±25 to 136±25%, p=0.058; IG vs. CG: p=0.003) improved significantly in IG and remained unchanged in CG, whereas everyday physical activity (IG: 3756±4150 to 7092±6192, p<0.001; CG: 5251±5076 to 5609±4470 MET-min/week, p=0.539; IG vs. CG: p=0.067) improved significantly in IG and remained unchanged in CG, however the difference between groups only showed a statistical trend. In IG but not in CG subjects lost body fat (% of body weight: IG: 34.5±7.7 to 33.2±7.8%, p=0.003; CG: 35.0±9.1 to 34.8±7.4%; p=0.428; IG vs. CG: p=0.496), however no significant difference between groups was achieved. Cardiovascular risk profile assessed by HeartScore in these relatively healthy subjects remained essentially unchanged in both groups (p>0.05 for both groups). In quality of life assessment (SF-36), general health (p=0.008), vitality (p=0.003) and mental health (p=0.012) changed significantly in IG, whereas no significant changes were noted in CG (p>0.05, IG vs. CG: all p<0.001). No serious adverse events occurred during the study.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that active commuting to work may counteract certain downsides of a sedentary lifestyle without prolonging the time-period of the commuting to work substantially.



Based on your interests

Three reasons why you should become a member

Become a member now
  • 1Access your congress resources all year-round on the New ESC 365
  • 2Get a discount on your next congress registration
  • 3Continue your professional development with free access to educational tools
Become a member now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, and Novartis Pharma AG. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are