Key result
Unfit but physically active men had a lower IHD mortality rate than unfit sedentary men (6% vs 10%; RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.06-2.64; P=0.027), while fitness provided no protection in sedentary men.
Why the study?
Does physical fitness or physical activity predict ischaemic heart disease mortality in middle-aged men?
Population
4,999 men aged 40-59 years from the Copenhagen Male Study
Comparison
Leisure time physical activity and physical… vs Sedentary lifestyle and low physical fitness
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
17 years
Authors
Loading...
Activity may benefit unfit men; leaves open whether fitness or activity should be prioritized in IHD prevention trials.
Cohort (n=4,999)
Does physical fitness or physical activity predict ischaemic heart disease mortality in middle-aged men?
Effect estimate: RR 1.67 (95% CI 1.06-2.64)
Absolute Event Rate: 6% vs 10%
p-value: p=0.027
Physical activity provides protection against IHD mortality even in unfit men, whereas high physical fitness does not protect sedentary men.
Hein et al. (1992) conducted a cohort in Ischaemic heart disease (n=4,999). Physical fitness and physical activity vs. Sedentary lifestyle and low fitness was evaluated on IHD mortality (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.06-2.64, p=0.027). Unfit but physically active men had a lower IHD mortality rate than unfit sedentary men (6% vs 10%; RR 1.67; 95% CI 1.06-2.64; P=0.027), while fitness provided no protection in sedentary men.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: