Patterns and Correlates of Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior Among Bangkok Residents: A Cross-sectional Study

Background: Physical inactivity and sedentary behavior are significant risk factors for various non-communicable diseases. Bangkok, Thailand's capital, is one of the fastest-growing metropolitans in Southeast Asia. Few studies have investigated the epidemiology of physical activity and sedentary behavior among Bangkok residents. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of combined physical activity and sedentary behavior patterns among Bangkok residents and examine relationships between participants' characteristics and the combined movement patterns.

Methods: We analyzed data from the nationally representative 2021 Health Behavior Survey conducted by the Thailand National Statistical Office. The Global Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to assess physical activity and sedentary behavior. 'Sufficiently active' was defined as meeting the World Health Organization's guidelines for aerobic physical activity (≥150 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per week). 'Low sedentary time' was defined as sitting for ≤7 hours per day. Participants were categorized into one of four movement patterns: highly active/low sedentary, highly active/highly sedentary, low active/low sedentary, and low active/highly sedentary. Multinomial logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with each group of four movement patterns.

Results: Among the 3,137 individuals included in the study, the majority were categorized as highly active/highly sedentary (64.8%), followed by highly active/low sedentary (17.9%) and low active/highly sedentary (14.3%). Only a few (3.0%) of participants were categorized as being low active/low sedentary. Compared to males, female participants had a significantly higher likelihood of belonging to the highly active/low sedentary (AOR = 1.69, 95%CI: 1.25, 2.28) or highly active/highly sedentary (AOR = 1.51, 95%CI: 1.19, 1.93) group, rather than the low active/high sedentary group. Compared to unemployed/retired participants, those in labor-intensive occupations had a significantly higher likelihood of being in the highly active/low sedentary group (AOR = 1.89, 95%CI: 1.22, 2.94). Compared to participants with no chronic physical conditions, participants who reported multimorbidity had a significantly lower likelihood of being in the highly active/low sedentary group (AOR = 0.60, 95%CI: 0.37, 0.98).

Conclusion: This study provides valuable insights into the patterns of physical activity and sedentary behavior among residents of Bangkok using up-to-date data. The majority belonged to the highly active/highly sedentary group, followed by the highly active/low sedentary group. Correlates such as sex, occupation, and chronic conditions were associated with these patterns. Targeted interventions in recreational activities, workplaces, and urban areas, including screen time control measures, movement breaks and improved built environments, are crucial in reducing sedentary behavior and promoting physical activity.