Key result
Sedentary behavior interventions improved flow-mediated dilation in both short-term (MD 1.50%; 95% CI 1.00-1.99) and long-term (MD 0.93%; 95% CI 0.25-1.62) settings, with no effect on PWV.
Why the study?
Sedentary behavior leads to hemodynamic alterations and vascular dysfunction that may be attenuated by various interventions, prompting evaluation of the effect of sedentary behavior interventions on adult vascular function.
Do sedentary behavior interventions improve vascular function in adults?
Meta-Analysis (n=669)
Yes
Do sedentary behavior interventions improve vascular function in adults?
Both short- and long-term sedentary behavior interventions improve flow-mediated dilation, suggesting a beneficial effect on vascular function.
Sedentary behavior interventions should be recommended to improve endothelial function; extends meta-analytic evidence for lifestyle effects on vascular health.
Sedentary behavior (SB) results in hemodynamic alterations within the vasculature, leading to vascular dysfunction that may be attenuated by various interventions. This systematic review and meta‐analysis examined the effect of SB interventions on vascular function in adults using seven databases searched on December 17, 2020. All types of SB interventions were included such as short‐ and long‐term interventions (≥7 days) in participants aged ≥18 years. The pooled effect (mean difference) of intervention on three outcomes, namely, flow‐mediated dilation (FMD), shear rate (SR), and pulse wave velocity (PWV), was evaluated using random effects meta‐analyses. The revised Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool for randomized trials was employed to assess the quality of the included studies. Twenty‐six studies (21 short‐term and six long‐term interventions) involving 669 participants from eight countries were included. Evidence from meta‐analysis showed that short‐term interventions targeting SB improved FMD by 1.50% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00–1.99) and increased SR by 12.70 S −1 (95% CI 7.86–17.54); no significant pooled effect was found for PWV. Long‐term SB interventions resulted in a 0.93% increase in FMD (95% CI 0.25–1.62) and had no significant effect on PWV. Findings of this systematic review and meta‐analysis suggest that both short‐ and long‐term SB interventions improved FMD but had no effect on PWV. Short‐term interventions had a greater effect in improving lower extremity arterial function. Further studies targeting long‐term SB interventions on vascular function in adults are warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zheng et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in Vascular dysfunction associated with sedentary behavior (n=669). Sedentary behavior interventions vs. Control was evaluated on Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) for short-term interventions (MD 1.50, 95% CI 1.00-1.99). Sedentary behavior interventions improved flow-mediated dilation in both short-term (MD 1.50%; 95% CI 1.00-1.99) and long-term (MD 0.93%; 95% CI 0.25-1.62) settings, with no effect on PWV.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: