1. Health differences between adolescents who commute actively to school and those who travel by vehicle David A. Rowe FACSM 1, Non Thomas 2, Rhys Williams 2 1 University of Strathclyde, 2 Swansea University Background  Active commuting to and from school is a convenient method of increasing children’s physical activity and improving their health (Tudor-Locke et al., 2001)  Limited evidence exists regarding health differences of children who commute actively to school (e.g., walk, cycle) compared to by motorized vehicle (e.g., car, bus)  Most such studies have focused primarily on body composition and fitness (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006; Heelan et al., 2005)  Need for investigation of cardiometabolic markers of health Methods Summary/Discussion  Participants: A cohort of Caucasian adolescents (N = 221; aged 12-14 yr) from three high schools in Wales  Part of Prosiect Sir Gâr (the Carmarthenshire project)  Measures  Single item measure of primary commuting mode  Cardiovascular fitness (Bleep Test/PACER Test)  Body composition (waist circumference, body mass index, sum of skinfolds)  Inflammation (C-reactive protein, high-molecular weight adiponectin, Interleukin-6)  Glucose regulation (fasting glucose, insulin)  Resting blood pressure (diastolic, systolic)  Fasting blood lipids (triglycerides, total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, HDL/TC ratio)  Data processing and analysis:  Data corrected for non-normality by log transformation  Sex-specific z-scores computed for variables where there was a significant sex difference  Mean scores compared using independent groups t-tests  Cohen’s d computed to interpret effect sizes  Small effect d = 0.2; medium effect d = 0.5; large effect d > 0.8 (Cohen, 1988)  PASW version 18.0.0 (IBM Corp, Somers NY) used for all analyses  All significance tests used nominal p =.05  All procedures were approved by Dyfed-Powys NHS Research Ethics Committee  Parental consent and child assent obtained  Main conclusions  Based on self-reported commuting behavior, children who actively commute to and/or from school have healthier waist adiposity and body weight, cholesterol sub-fractions, blood lipids, and possibly inflammation  No health indicators are worse in children who actively commute to and/or from school, compared to children who travel primarily in a vehicle  Recommendations  Further research is needed that purposively recruits larger samples of active commuters, and investigates the prospective effect of active commuting on children’s health i Purpose  To compare active and vehicle school commuters on a variety of different markers of health References 1.Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 2.Cooper, A., et al. (2006). Active travel to school and cardiovascular fitness in Danish children and adolescents. Med Sci Sports Exerc, 38, 1724–1731. 3.Heelan, K., et al. (2005). Active commuting to and from school and BMI in elementary school children – preliminary data. Child: Care, Health, Development, 31, 341-349. 4.Tudor-Locke, C., et al. (2001). Active commuting to school: An overlooked source of childrens' physical activity? Sports Med, 31, 309-313. Acknowledgments: This study was part-funded by grants from Swansea School of Medicine and the University of Wales Institute, Cardiff For further details on Prosiect Sir Gâr, contact Professor Non Thomas, Centre for Children and Young People's Health and Well-Being, Swansea University: N.E.Thomas@swansea.ac.uk Results  Number of commuters  32 children (14.5%) reported actively commuting at least one way (to or from school)  Significant differences  In descending order of effect size, the active commuters were significantly (p <.05) healthier than passive commuters on the following variables (absolute values of d reported):  HDL/Total cholesterol ratio (d = 0.73)  HDL-cholesterol (d = 0.71)  triglycerides (d = 0.45)  fibrinogen (d = 0.45)  waist circumference (d = 0.42)  body mass index (d = 0.41)  LDL-cholesterol (d = 0.40)  Non-significant differences  There were no significant group differences (p >.05) for sum of skinfolds, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, HMW-adiponectin, C-reactive protein, and interleukin-6 (d ranged from 0.03- 0.24)  No health variables were significantly worse in active commuters Table 1. Mean comparison, active commuters vs. vehicle Vehicle (n = 189)Active (n = 32) VariableMeanSDMeanSDCohen’s D HDL/TC ratio*0.420.090.480.080.73 HDL (mmol)*1.650.331.890.330.71 TC/HDL ratio*2.500.552.150.36-0.67 Fibrinogen (mmol)*2.690.482.480.36-0.45 Triglycerides (z)*0.081.00-0.360.92-0.45 Waist Circumference (z)*0.001.01-0.400.72-0.42 BMI (kg/m 2 )*21.133.7719.612.93-0.41 LDL (mmol)*2.040.571.810.57-0.40 Systolic BP (mm Hg)115.8511.43118.5510.860.24 Bleep test (laps)53.9920.0057.3722.260.17 Sum skinfolds (mm)50.6925.1646.6120.99-0.17 Interleukin-6 (zLogn)-0.030.99-0.140.80-0.11 Glucose (z)0.011.010.100.950.09 Diastolic BP (mm Hg)65.4410.4364.659.53-0.08 Insulin (mm)9.334.269.033.87-0.07 C-reactive protein (zLogn)-0.041.030.010.750.05 Total Cholesterol (mmol)4.000.653.970.69-0.05 HMW-adiponectin (z)0.061.010.031.09-0.03 Contact details: david.rowe@strath.ac.uk * p <.05