Nicholas D. Gilson

Bio: Nicholas D. Gilson is an academic researcher from University of Queensland. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sitting & Medicine. The author has an hindex of 27, co-authored 90 publications receiving 2981 citations. Previous affiliations of Nicholas D. Gilson include Liverpool Hope University & Leeds Beckett University.

Measuring and Influencing Physical Activity with Smartphone Technology: A Systematic Review

Abstract: Rapid developments in technology have encouraged the use of smartphones in physical activity research, although little is known regarding their effectiveness as measurement and intervention tools. This study systematically reviewed evidence on smartphones and their viability for measuring and influencing physical activity. Research articles were identified in September 2013 by literature searches in Web of Knowledge, PubMed, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and ScienceDirect. The search was restricted using the terms (physical activity OR exercise OR fitness) AND (smartphone* OR mobile phone* OR cell phone*) AND (measurement OR intervention). Reviewed articles were required to be published in international academic peer-reviewed journals, or in full text from international scientific conferences, and focused on measuring physical activity through smartphone processing data and influencing people to be more active through smartphone applications. Two reviewers independently performed the selection of articles and examined titles and abstracts to exclude those out of scope. Data on study characteristics, technologies used to objectively measure physical activity, strategies applied to influence activity; and the main study findings were extracted and reported. A total of 26 articles (with the first published in 2007) met inclusion criteria. All studies were conducted in highly economically advantaged countries; 12 articles focused on special populations (e.g. obese patients). Studies measured physical activity using native mobile features, and/or an external device linked to an application. Measurement accuracy ranged from 52 to 100 % (n = 10 studies). A total of 17 articles implemented and evaluated an intervention. Smartphone strategies to influence physical activity tended to be ad hoc, rather than theory-based approaches; physical activity profiles, goal setting, real-time feedback, social support networking, and online expert consultation were identified as the most useful strategies to encourage physical activity change. Only five studies assessed physical activity intervention effects; all used step counts as the outcome measure. Four studies (three pre–post and one comparative) reported physical activity increases (12–42 participants, 800–1,104 steps/day, 2 weeks–6 months), and one case-control study reported physical activity maintenance (n = 200 participants; >10,000 steps/day) over 3 months. Smartphone use is a relatively new field of study in physical activity research, and consequently the evidence base is emerging. Few studies identified in this review considered the validity of phone-based assessment of physical activity. Those that did report on measurement properties found average-to-excellent levels of accuracy for different behaviors. The range of novel and engaging intervention strategies used by smartphones, and user perceptions on their usefulness and viability, highlights the potential such technology has for physical activity promotion. However, intervention effects reported in the extant literature are modest at best, and future studies need to utilize randomized controlled trial research designs, larger sample sizes, and longer study periods to better explore the physical activity measurement and intervention capabilities of smartphones.

Participatory workplace interventions can reduce sedentary time for office workers--a randomised controlled trial.

Abstract: Background: Occupational sedentary behaviour is an important contributor to overall sedentary risk. There is limited evidence for effective workplace interventions to reduce occupational sedentary time and increase light activity during work hours. The purpose of the study was to determine if participatory workplace interventions could reduce total sedentary time, sustained sedentary time (bouts .30 minutes), increase the frequency of breaks in sedentary time and promote light intensity activity and moderate/vigorous activity (MVPA) during work hours. Methods: A randomised controlled trial (ANZCTR number: ACTN12612000743864) was conducted using clerical, call centre and data processing workers (n=62, aged 25–59 years) in 3 large government organisations in Perth, Australia. Three groups developed interventions with a participatory approach: ‘Active office’ (n=19), ‘Active Workstation’ and promotion of incidental office activity; ‘Traditional physical activity’ (n=14), pedometer challenge to increase activity between productive work time and ‘Office ergonomics’ (n=29), computer workstation design and breaking up computer tasks. Accelerometer (ActiGraph GT3X, 7 days) determined sedentary time, sustained sedentary time, breaks in sedentary time, light intensity activity and MVPA on work days and during work hours were measured before and following a 12 week intervention period. Results: For all participants there was a significant reduction in sedentary time on work days (21.6%, p=0.006) and during work hours (21.7%, p=0.014) and a significant increase in number of breaks/sedentary hour on work days (0.64, p=0.005) and during work hours (0.72, p=0.015); there was a concurrent significant increase in light activity during work hours (1.5%, p=0.012) and MVPA on work days (0.6%, p=0.012). Conclusions: This study explored novel ways to modify work practices to reduce occupational sedentary behaviour. Participatory workplace interventions can reduce sedentary time, increase the frequency of breaks and improve light activity and MVPA of office workers by using a variety of interventions.

Does physical activity impact on presenteeism and other indicators of workplace well-being?

Abstract: The term 'presenteeism' is a relatively new concept in workplace health, and has come to signify being at work despite poor health and performing below par. Presenteeism, which is potentially critical to employers, has been associated with a range of psychosocial outcome measures, such as poor mental health and employee well-being. Physical activity is a potential strategy for reducing presenteeism, and for improving the mental health of employees. This article reviews evidence on the relationships between physical activity and employee well-being and presenteeism in the workplace, and identifies directions for research in an emerging field. Electronic and manual literature searches were used to identify 20 articles that met the inclusion criteria. These included 13 intervention trials (8 randomized controlled trials, 5 comparison trials) and 7 observational studies (3 cohort, 4 cross-sectional). Outcome measures were grouped into 'workplace well-being', 'psychosocial well-being' and 'physical well-being'. Studies measured a wide variety of outcomes, with absenteeism being the most commonly assessed. Evidence indicated a positive association between physical activity and psychosocial health in employees, particularly for quality of life and emotional well-being. However, findings were inconclusive as to the role of physical activity in promoting workplace well-being. Only one study reported on presenteeism, with mixed evidence for outcomes. This article indicates that physical activity and employee psychosocial health are positively related, but there is limited evidence of a relationship between physical activity and presenteeism. A standardized definition of presenteeism and an appropriate evaluation tool are key research priorities if the complex relationships between physical activity and workplace well-being are to be better understood.

Lack of exercise is a major cause of chronic diseases

Abstract: Chronic diseases are major killers in the modern era. Physical inactivity is a primary cause of most chronic diseases. The initial third of the article considers: activity and prevention definitions; historical evidence showing physical inactivity is detrimental to health and normal organ functional capacities; cause vs. treatment; physical activity and inactivity mechanisms differ; gene-environment interaction [including aerobic training adaptations, personalized medicine, and co-twin physical activity]; and specificity of adaptations to type of training. Next, physical activity/exercise is examined as primary prevention against 35 chronic conditions [Accelerated biological aging/premature death, low cardiorespiratory fitness (VO2max), sarcopenia, metabolic syndrome, obesity, insulin resistance, prediabetes, type 2 diabetes, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, coronary heart disease, peripheral artery disease, hypertension, stroke, congestive heart failure, endothelial dysfunction, arterial dyslipidemia, hemostasis, deep vein thrombosis, cognitive dysfunction, depression and anxiety, osteoporosis, osteoarthritis, balance, bone fracture/falls, rheumatoid arthritis, colon cancer, breast cancer, endometrial cancer, gestational diabetes, preeclampsia, polycystic ovary syndrome, erectile dysfunction, pain, diverticulitis, constipation, and gallbladder diseases]. The article ends with consideration of deterioration of risk factors in longer-term sedentary groups; clinical consequences of inactive childhood/adolescence; and public policy. In summary, the body rapidly maladapts to insufficient physical activity, and if continued, results in substantial decreases in both total and quality years of life. Taken together, conclusive evidence exists that physical inactivity is one important cause of most chronic diseases. In addition, physical activity primarily prevents, or delays, chronic diseases, implying that chronic disease need not be an inevitable outcome during life.

Sedentary time in adults and the association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract: Aims/hypothesis Sedentary (sitting) behaviours are ubiquitous in modern society. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association of sedentary time with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.

Sitting Time and All-Cause Mortality Risk in 222 497 Australian Adults

Abstract: Background:Prolonged sitting is considered detrimental to health, but evidence regarding the independent relationship of total sitting time with all-cause mortality is limited. This study aimed to determine the independent relationship of sitting time with all-cause mortality. Methods:Welinkedprospectivequestionnairedatafrom 222497 individuals 45 years or older from the 45 and Up Study to mortality data from the New South Wales RegistryofBirths,Deaths,andMarriages(Australia)from February1,2006,throughDecember31,2010.Coxproportional hazards models examined all-cause mortality in relation to sitting time, adjusting for potential confounders that included sex, age, education, urban/rural residence, physical activity, body mass index, smoking status, self-rated health, and disability. Results:During621695person-yearsoffollow-up(mean follow-up, 2.8 years), 5405 deaths were registered. Allcause mortality hazard ratios were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.951.09),1.15(1.06-1.25),and1.40(1.27-1.55)for4toless than 8, 8 to less than 11, and 11 or more h/d of sitting, respectively,comparedwithlessthan4h/d,adjustingfor physicalactivityandotherconfounders.Thepopulationattributable fraction for sitting was 6.9%. The associationbetweensittingandall-causemortalityappearedconsistent across the sexes, age groups, body mass index categories,andphysicalactivitylevelsandacrosshealthy participants compared with participants with preexisting cardiovascular disease or diabetes mellitus. Conclusions: Prolonged sitting is a risk factor for allcause mortality, independent of physical activity. Publichealthprogramsshouldfocusonreducingsittingtime in addition to increasing physical activity levels.