Association between pelvic pain bothersomeness and pain sensitivity: A community-based cross-sectional study of young adult females in the Raine Study.

OBJECTIVE: Pelvic pain has been associated with augmented nociceptive processing, but large studies controlling for multiple potential confounding factors are lacking. This study investigated the association between pelvic pain bothersomeness and pain sensitivity in young adult women, accounting for potential confounding factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community-dwelling sample. POPULATION: The Raine Study Gen2-22 year follow-up (n = 475). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The experience of bothersomeness related to pelvic pain was determined from a question in the Urogenital Distress Inventory short form. Pain sensitivity was measured using pressure pain and cold pain thresholds. Potential confounding factors included ethnicity, marital status, highest level of education, income, waist-hip ratio, level of activity, sleep quality, smoking, comorbidity history, C-reactive protein level, musculoskeletal pain experience and psychological distress. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-two women (76.2%) reported no pelvic pain bothersomeness, 74 (15.6%) reported mild pelvic pain bothersomeness and 39 (8.2%) reported moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness. After adjusting for marital status (and test site), moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness was associated with a lower pressure pain threshold (i.e. greater pressure pain sensitivity) (coefficient -51.46, 95% CI -98.06 to -4.86, p = 0.030). After adjusting for smoking, moderate-severe pelvic pain bothersomeness was also associated with a higher cold pain threshold (i.e. greater cold pain sensitivity) (coefficient 4.35, 95% CI 0.90-7.79, p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests augmented nociceptive processing as a contributing factor in pelvic pain bothersomeness for some women. Thorough assessment of women who present clinically with pelvic pain should consider pain sensitivity as a potential contributing factor to their presentation.

Patterns of Change in Device-Based Physical Activity and Sedentary Time Following Bariatric Surgery: a Longitudinal Observational Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to investigate changes in physical activity (PA) and sedentary time (ST) over 12 months following bariatric surgery. METHODS: Pre-surgery and at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-surgery, wearable devices were used to measure PA at different intensities, grouped according to energy expenditure and daily step count, and ST. Measures were also collected of weight and self-efficacy for exercise. Pre- and 12 months post-surgery, measures were collected of body composition and cardiovascular fitness. RESULTS: Thirty adults scheduled for bariatric surgery were recruited (20 females, 44.1 [range, 22.0 to 65.0] years, body mass index 39.6 [range, 30.9 to 50.9] kg/m2). When compared to pre-surgery measures, over the 12 months post-surgery, there were no changes in the percentage of waking hours (mean [95% CI]) spent in ST (- 2% [- 6 to 3]), light intensity PA (1% [- 3 to 5]), and moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA (1% [- 1 to 3]). At all time points, participants spent most (> 70%) of their waking hours accumulating ST, with little time spent in light intensity PA (~ 21%) and almost no time in moderate-to-vigorous intensity PA (~ 5%). Step count and cardiovascular fitness were also unchanged. There were significant changes in weight, self-efficacy for exercise, and body composition. CONCLUSIONS: Although bariatric surgery resulted in substantial weight loss and improved self-efficacy for exercise, it was insufficient to effect change in PA, ST or cardiovascular fitness. Complementing surgical intervention with behavioral interventions may optimize change in PA and ST.

Do factors related to participation in physical activity change following restrictive bariatric surgery? A qualitative study.

AIMS: To explore participants' ability to participate in physical activity (PA), and barriers and facilitators to PA, at 12 months following restrictive bariatric surgery, and how these differed from participants' pre-surgery perceptions. Motivators for PA post-surgery were also explored. METHODS: Qualitative one-on-one in-depth interviews were conducted pre- and 12 months post-surgery. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen adults (12 females), with a mean (range) age of 41.4 years (25.0-56.0), body mass index (BMI) of 31.7kg/m2 (22.3-48.2), and excess weight loss of 66% (2-127) completed both interviews. Lack of participation in PA during the first 3-6 months post-surgery was a common theme. Although participants reported increased ability to participate in PA, attributing this to a reduction in obesity-related physical barriers to PA, many participants reported that some pre-surgery obesity-related barriers to PA remained at 12 months post-surgery. For most participants, pre-surgery non-obesity related barriers to PA also remained at 12 months post-surgery. Facilitators to PA were consistent pre- and post-surgery. Weight loss and improvement in physical appearance were the most common motivators for PA post-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: At 12 months following surgery, many participants reported residual obesity and non-obesity related barriers to PA. These barriers may explain the small, if any, pre- to post-surgery change in PA levels reported by earlier research. Facilitators to PA did not change and post-surgery motivators for PA were mostly esteem-related. These data are relevant to shape interventions aimed at optimising PA in this population.

Beliefs, Barriers and Facilitators to Physical Activity in Bariatric Surgery Candidates.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery candidates engage in less physical activity (PA) and spend longer periods in sedentary behaviour (SB) when compared to the general adult population. The aim of this study was to explore the beliefs about PA and perceived barriers and facilitators to PA in obese adults scheduled for bariatric surgery. METHODS: Nineteen obese adults (15 females), with a mean (SD) age of 41.6 (12.1) years, weight of 119.2 (20.5) kg and body mass index of 41.6 (6.7) kg/m(2) participated in a one-on-one in-depth qualitative interview before undergoing bariatric surgery. Data were analysed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most participants believed that engaging in regular PA confers important health benefits, however reported insufficient PA levels to obtain those benefits. The perceived barriers to PA reported by participants were both obesity related (e.g. bodily pain, physical limitation and self-presentational concerns) and non-obesity related (e.g. lack of motivation, environment and restricted resources). All participants stated weight loss to be the main perceived facilitator to PA, together with social factors, better time management and access to financial resources. CONCLUSIONS: In bariatric surgery candidates, many of the perceived barriers and facilitators to PA are not obesity related and are therefore unlikely to change as a result of bariatric surgery. This may explain why earlier research shows little change in PA or SB following surgery. It is likely that an approach that aims to address the barriers and facilitators identified in this study is needed to change the inactive lifestyle adopted in this population.

Long-term effects of a program to increase physical activity in smokers.

BACKGROUND: Programs aimed at increasing physical activity in daily life (PADL) have generated growing interest to prevent the deleterious effects of physical inactivity. Recent literature has shown that a short-term protocol using pedometers increased PADL in smokers with normal lung function. However, the long-term effects of such a protocol were not yet studied. The objective of this study was to evaluate the results of 1-year follow-up after a program aimed at increasing PADL in smokers with normal lung function. METHODS: Twenty-four smokers were followed (15 men; mean [interquartile range (IQR)], 51 [41-57] years of age; BMI, 26 [22-29] kg/m2; 20 [20-30] cigarettes/d). Subjects were assessed at baseline, immediately after completion of the program, and 1 year later for PADL, lung function, 6-min walking distance (6MWD), smoking habits, quality of life, anxiety, and depression. The 5-month program used pedometers and informative booklets as interventions. RESULTS: The gains achieved after the program were maintained in the long term: steps/d (postprogram vs 1-year follow-up, mean [IQR]: 10,572 [9,804-12,237] vs 10,438 [9,151-12,862]); 6MWD (625 [530-694] m, 88 [81-97] % predicted vs 609 [539-694] m, 89 [81-96] % predicted), anxiety (34 [26-41] points vs 35 [36-47] points) and depression (6 [2-9] points vs 5 [2-11] points) (P > .05 for all). One year after the program, 20% of the subjects had quit smoking. CONCLUSIONS: In smokers with normal lung function, improvements in daily physical activity, exercise capacity, anxiety, and depression obtained through a 5-month program aimed at increasing physical activity are sustained 1 year after completion of the program. Furthermore, such a program can contribute to smoking cessation in this population.

Reduction of physical activity in daily life and its determinants in smokers without airflow obstruction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In smokers without airflow obstruction, detailed, objective and controlled quantification of the level of physical inactivity in daily life has never been performed. This study aimed to objectively assess the level of physical activity in daily life in adult smokers without airflow obstruction in comparison with matched non-smokers, and to investigate the determinants for daily physical activity in smokers. METHODS: Sixty smokers (aged 50 (39-54) years) and 50 non-smokers (aged 48 (40-53) years) matched for gender, age, anthropometric characteristics, educational level, employment status and seasons of the year assessment period were cross-sectionally assessed regarding their daily physical activity with a step counter, besides assessment of lung function, functional exercise capacity, quality of life, anxiety, depression, self-reported comorbidities carbon monoxide level, nicotine dependence and smoking habits. RESULTS: When compared with non-smokers, smokers walked less in daily life (7923 ± 3558 vs 9553 ± 3637 steps/day, respectively), presented worse lung function, functional exercise capacity, quality of life, anxiety and depression. Multiple regression analyses identified functional exercise capacity, Borg fatigue, self-reported motivation/physical activity behaviour and cardiac disease as significant determinants of number of steps/day in smokers (partial r(2) = 0.10, 0.12, 0.16 and 0.05; b = 15, -997, 1207 and -2330 steps/day, respectively; overall fit of the model R(2) = 0.38; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Adult smokers without airflow obstruction presented reduced level of daily physical activity. Functional exercise capacity, extended fatigue sensation, aspects of motivation/physical activity behaviour and self-reported cardiac disease are significant determinants of physical activity in daily life in smokers.

Comparison of two strategies using pedometers to counteract physical inactivity in smokers.

INTRODUCTION: This randomized crossover trial aimed to compare the effects of 2 different protocols using pedometers and informative booklets to increase physical activity in daily life (PADL) in smokers. METHODS: PADL level was assessed at baseline (A1), and subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups for a month: booklet + pedometer (GB + P; n = 13), which started the protocol receiving a booklet with encouragement to walk as much as possible in everyday life; pedometer + booklet (GP + B; n = 18), which started the protocol wearing a pedometer aiming to achieve 10,000 steps/day. PADL was reassessed (A2), and the interventions were crossed over for 1 month, followed by PADL reassessment (A3). After A3, both groups used pedometers for 3 months aiming to reach 10,000 steps/day, and final PADL assessment was performed (A4). For the analysis, each group was subdivided according to baseline PADL as physically active or inactive, according to having reached or not reached 10,000 steps/day at baseline. RESULTS: The physically active subgroups of GB + P and GP + B showed no change in steps/day. The physically inactive subgroup of GP + B significantly increased steps/day at A2 and maintained this increase until A4. The physically inactive subgroup of GB + P initially increased to a lesser extent, reaching borderline statistical significance at A2 and A3 (p = .06) and statistically significant increase only at A4 (p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Both strategies were effective in increasing the number of steps/day in physically inactive smokers after 5 months, although the increase was more quickly obtained in smokers who used pedometers as the first intervention.

Short-term effects of using pedometers to increase daily physical activity in smokers: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: In adults it is recommended that the minimum of 10,000 steps/day should be performed in order to consider an individual as active. The pedometer, a small device that counts steps, has been used to monitor and/or motivate physical activity in various populations. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the short-term effects of a protocol using a pedometer or an informative booklet to increase daily physical activity in apparently healthy smokers who reached or did not reach the minimum public health recommendation of 10,000 steps/day. METHODS: Subjects were randomly assigned to 2 groups: group pedometer (GP, n = 23), who wore a pedometer every day during 1 month, aiming to achieve 10,000 steps/day; and group booklet (GB, n = 17), who received a booklet with encouragement to walk as much as possible in everyday life. Each group was subdivided according to their baseline daily physical activity level: active (subjects who achieved 10,000 steps/day), and inactive (those who did not achieve this minimum). RESULTS: Only the physically inactive GP increased significantly its daily physical activity (pre vs post 7,670 [6,159-9,402] steps/day vs 10,310 [9,483-11,110] steps/day, P < .001), with a concomitant increase in the 6-min walking test (6MWT) distance (mean and interquartile range 540 m [501-586 m] vs 566 m [525-604 m], P = .03). In GP, Δ post-pre steps/day correlated significantly with baseline number of steps/day (r = -0.63, P = .01), but not with 6MWT. In the inactive subjects (summing GP and GB), there were significant correlations between steps/day and cigarettes/day, pack-years, and Fagerström questionnaire (r = -0.55, -0.40, and -0.59, P ≤ .05 for all). Furthermore, improvement in steps/day in the inactive subjects of GP was correlated with baseline cigarettes smoked per day, pack-years, and Fagerström questionnaire (r = 0.51, 0.65 and 0.53, P ≤ .05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Physically inactive smokers improve their daily physical activity level by using a simple tool (pedometer), and larger improvement occurs in subjects with the lowest levels of physical activity.