Comparison of energy expenditure of tasks in standing and sitting in adolescent girls.
BACKGROUND: Adolescent girls are prone to increased sedentary behavior and are more sedentary than their male peers or younger girls. This study compared the energy required for identical tasks in standing and sitting. METHOD: Energy expenditure (EE) was measured using indirect calorimetry (n = 24)...
| Publicado en: | Work Vol. 66; no. 1; pp. 17 - 24 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
2020
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=143829233&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 143829233 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 10519815 3RC jtl: Work issn: 10519815 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2020 vid: 66 iid: 1 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. place: Thousand Oaks, California artinfo: ui: 143829233 143829233 147566303 143829233 10.3233/WOR-203146 143829233 ppf: 17 ppct: 7 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Comparison of energy expenditure of tasks in standing and sitting in adolescent girls. aug: au: Dockrell, Sara Forde, Cuisle Gormley, John affil: Discipline of Physiotherapy, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland sug: subj: Energy Metabolism Evaluation Standing Sitting Task Performance and Analysis Women's Health Human Female Adolescence Randomized Controlled Trials Random Assignment Quasi-Experimental Studies Cross Sectional Studies Convenience Sample Calorimetry Sedentary Behavior Data Analysis Software Descriptive Statistics T-Tests Confidence Intervals Analysis of Variance Post Hoc Analysis Posture Body Composition Adolescent: 13-18 years Female ab: BACKGROUND: Adolescent girls are prone to increased sedentary behavior and are more sedentary than their male peers or younger girls. This study compared the energy required for identical tasks in standing and sitting. METHOD: Energy expenditure (EE) was measured using indirect calorimetry (n = 24) in four tasks (sitting/standing quietly; reading; typing; sorting paper) under two postural conditions (sitting; standing). The currently accepted definition for sedentary behavior of energy expenditure of ≤1.5 metabolic equivalents (METs) and being in a seated or reclining position was used. RESULTS: All seated tasks resulted in mean EE <1.5 METs with the exception of sorting paper. All standing tasks resulted in mean EE of >1.5 METs with the exception of standing quietly. Standing sorting paper was the only task with a mean EE significantly >1.5 METs. A significant interaction between task and posture was found. CONCLUSIONS: Active tasks in standing had significantly greater EE than in sitting, and sorting paper while standing was the only task with an EE significantly >1.5 METs. The difference between the two postures is likely too low to produce positive metabolic health benefits in the short term. Studies of the effects of long-term use of standing desks in the classroom are required. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts randomized controlled trial Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|