A cross-sectional study on the perceived barriers to physical activity and their associations with domain-specific physical activity and sedentary behaviour

• Published in: BMC public health Vol. 22; no. 1; pp. 1051 - 11
• Main Authors: Koh, Yen Sin, Asharani, P. V., Devi, Fiona, Roystonn, Kumarasan, Wang, Peizhi, Vaingankar, Janhavi Ajit, Abdin, Edimansyah, Sum, Chee Fang, Lee, Eng Sing, Müller-Riemenschneider, Falk, Chong, Siow Ann, Subramaniam, Mythily
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central 26.05.2022; BioMed Central Ltd; BMC
• Subjects: Adult; Age; Age groups; Analysis; Barriers to physical activity; Biostatistics; Chronic illnesses; COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diabetes; Environmental Health; Epidemiology; Ethnicity; Evaluation; Exercise; Fatigue; Fatigue - epidemiology; Heart rate; Humans; Independent variables; Leisure Activities; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Mental disorders; Mental health; Metabolism; Methods; Parks; Pavements; Physical activity; Physical fitness; Physical training; Pollution dispersion; Population; Public Health; Questionnaires; Safety; Sample size; Sedentary Behavior; Sedentary behaviour; Social interactions; Surveys; Surveys and Questionnaires; Vaccine; Weather; Zero-inflated model; Singapore; Physical activity; Barriers to physical activity; Sedentary behaviour; Zero-inflated model
• ISSN: 1471-2458; 1471-2458
• DOI: 10.1186/s12889-022-13431-2

Background Physical inactivity and sedentary behaviour have detrimental consequences to the individual and the economy. Our study examined the prevalence of perceived barriers to physical activity in Singapore’s adult population and their associations with physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Methods This cross-sectional analysis utilised data from a nationwide survey in Singapore. Participants ( n  = 2867) were recruited from February 2019 to March 2020. The independent variables were internal (e.g. fatigue, age) and external (e.g. weather, cost) perceived barriers to physical activity. The outcomes were domain-specific physical activity (work, transport and leisure) and sedentary behaviour, all of which were assessed using the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire. The associations were examined using zero-inflated negative binomial regressions for physical activity and linear regression for sedentary behaviour. Results The median (Interquartile range) for work-related, transport-related and leisure-related physical activity were 0 (0 – 1440), 600 (160 – 1120) and 360 (0 – 1080) MET (metabolic equivalent)-minutes per week. The median sedentary behaviour (IQR) was 360 (240 – 540) minutes per day. The top three barriers were lack of time (65.3%), fatigue (64.7%) and pollution (56.1%). After adjustment, the level of transport-related physical activity was lower for respondents who cited lacking pavement or parks as a barrier, but higher for those who indicated cost and safety concerns. Respondents who reported pollution as a barrier were more likely to engage in transport-related physical activity. The level of leisure-related physical activity was lower for respondents indicating weather, lack of time and age as barriers, but higher for those reporting safety concerns. The odds of engaging in leisure-related physical activity was lower for those citing age, cost and fatigue as barriers, but higher for those indicating the weather. Sedentary behaviour was positively associated with work and limited accessibility to exercise facilities, but negatively with safety concerns. Conclusion Individuals can be motivated to overcome internal barriers (fatigue, lack of time, cost and age) through social support and emphasis on exercise benefits. External barriers (weather and lack of pavements or parks) can be reduced by raising awareness of existing infrastructure. Sedentary behaviour can be improved by implementing workplace measures, such as reducing the time spent sitting.