Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Can individual, dyadic, or collaborative planning reduce sedentary behavior? A randomized controlled trial


Szczuka, Zofia; Kulis, Ewa; Boberska, Monika; Banik, Anna; Kruk, Magdalena; Keller, Jan; Knoll, Nina; Scholz, Urte; Abraham, Charles; Luszczynska, Aleksandra (2021). Can individual, dyadic, or collaborative planning reduce sedentary behavior? A randomized controlled trial. Social Science & Medicine, 287:114336.

Abstract

RATIONALE: Although effects of individual planning interventions on physical activity (PA) are well established, less is known about the relationships between planning and sedentary behavior (SB).

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy of individual planning, dyadic planning (i.e., joint planning, targeting the behavior of one person only: the target person), and collaborative planning (i.e., joint planning and joint behavioral performance) on sedentary behavior among dyads.

METHODS: Dyads (N = 320 target persons and their partners, aged 18-90 years) were randomized into three PA planning conditions (individual, dyadic, or collaborative) or an active (education) control condition. Main outcomes, i.e., sedentary time, proportion of time spent in SB and light-intensity PA, proportion of time spent in SB and total PA were measured with GT3X-BT accelerometers at baseline, 1-week follow-up, and 36-week follow-up. Two-level models with measurement points nested in participants were fit, separately for target persons and partners.

RESULTS: Findings for target persons obtained at 1-week follow-up indicated that in the collaborative planning condition SB time significantly decreased, compared to the control condition (p = .013). There was an improvement in the proportion of time spent in SB and light-intensity PA (p = .019), and the proportion of time spent in SB and total PA (p = .018), indicating that SB time was displaced by PA. Effects of individual and dyadic planning were not significant, compared to the control condition. None of interventions had a significant effect on SB indices at 36-week follow-up. Regarding dyadic partners, there were no effects of planning interventions at 1-week follow-up or 36-week follow-up, compared to the control condition.

CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative planning may prompt a short-term reduction of SB time and result in a shift towards a healthier balance between SB time and PA time among target persons, who did not adhere to PA guidelines at baseline.

Abstract

RATIONALE: Although effects of individual planning interventions on physical activity (PA) are well established, less is known about the relationships between planning and sedentary behavior (SB).

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy of individual planning, dyadic planning (i.e., joint planning, targeting the behavior of one person only: the target person), and collaborative planning (i.e., joint planning and joint behavioral performance) on sedentary behavior among dyads.

METHODS: Dyads (N = 320 target persons and their partners, aged 18-90 years) were randomized into three PA planning conditions (individual, dyadic, or collaborative) or an active (education) control condition. Main outcomes, i.e., sedentary time, proportion of time spent in SB and light-intensity PA, proportion of time spent in SB and total PA were measured with GT3X-BT accelerometers at baseline, 1-week follow-up, and 36-week follow-up. Two-level models with measurement points nested in participants were fit, separately for target persons and partners.

RESULTS: Findings for target persons obtained at 1-week follow-up indicated that in the collaborative planning condition SB time significantly decreased, compared to the control condition (p = .013). There was an improvement in the proportion of time spent in SB and light-intensity PA (p = .019), and the proportion of time spent in SB and total PA (p = .018), indicating that SB time was displaced by PA. Effects of individual and dyadic planning were not significant, compared to the control condition. None of interventions had a significant effect on SB indices at 36-week follow-up. Regarding dyadic partners, there were no effects of planning interventions at 1-week follow-up or 36-week follow-up, compared to the control condition.

CONCLUSIONS: Collaborative planning may prompt a short-term reduction of SB time and result in a shift towards a healthier balance between SB time and PA time among target persons, who did not adhere to PA guidelines at baseline.

Statistics

Citations

Altmetrics

Downloads

3 downloads since deposited on 22 Sep 2021
3 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Psychology
08 Research Priority Programs > Dynamics of Healthy Aging
Dewey Decimal Classification:150 Psychology
Scopus Subject Areas:Social Sciences & Humanities > Health (social science)
Social Sciences & Humanities > History and Philosophy of Science
Language:English
Date:21 August 2021
Deposited On:22 Sep 2021 15:24
Last Modified:23 Sep 2021 20:00
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0277-9536
OA Status:Hybrid
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114336
PubMed ID:34482277

Download

Hybrid Open Access

Download PDF  'Can individual, dyadic, or collaborative planning reduce sedentary behavior? A randomized controlled trial'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF
Size: 1MB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)