Suchergebnisse

Objectives We analysed the information on current national physical activity recommendations in all EU Member States provided by governments in a joint EU/WHO survey on the implementation status of the EU Council Recommendation on Health-Enhancing Physical Activity across Sectors. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU Member State governments to the EU Physical Activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures National recommendations on: (A) minimum frequency, duration, intensity and lengths of bouts of physical activity, (B) preventing inactivity or sedentary behaviour and (C) further recommendations for additional health benefits, obesity prevention and specific types of activity. Results An official document could be located for 23 of the 28 EU Member States, while four are currently developing recommendations. For children and adolescents, most countries follow the 2010 WHO Global Recommendations for Physical Activity, but there are notable differences in the delimitation of age groups. 14 countries also followed WHO in their recommendations for adults, and 11 countries have additional advice on avoiding inactivity and sitting among adults. 18 Member States have recommendations for older adults, 12 of which follow WHO. Thirteen countries also address at least one special population (eg, pregnant women, people with disabilities and people with chronic diseases), but the level of detail varies substantially between countries. Conclusions The large majority of EU Member States either has physical activity recommendations in place or is in the process of developing them. There is a general tendency to use the WHO Global Recommendations as a basis, with the greatest variation observable for children and adolescents. Comparing results with a previous round of data collection shows that the number of EU countries with physical activity recommendations is increasing and that both special groups and sedentary behaviour have become more important in recent years.

OBJECTIVES: We analysed the information on current national physical activity recommendations in all EU Member States provided by governments in a joint EU/WHO survey on the implementation status of the EU Council Recommendation on Health-Enhancing Physical Activity across Sectors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: The representatives of the 28 EU Member State governments to the EU Physical Activity Focal Point Network. OUTCOME MEASURES: National recommendations on: (A) minimum frequency, duration, intensity and lengths of bouts of physical activity, (B) preventing inactivity or sedentary behaviour and (C) further recommendations for additional health benefits, obesity prevention and specific types of activity. RESULTS: An official document could be located for 23 of the 28 EU Member States, while four are currently developing recommendations. For children and adolescents, most countries follow the 2010 WHO Global Recommendations for Physical Activity, but there are notable differences in the delimitation of age groups. 14 countries also followed WHO in their recommendations for adults, and 11 countries have additional advice on avoiding inactivity and sitting among adults. 18 Member States have recommendations for older adults, 12 of which follow WHO. Thirteen countries also address at least one special population (eg, pregnant women, people with disabilities and people with chronic diseases), but the level of detail varies substantially between countries. CONCLUSIONS: The large majority of EU Member States either has physical activity recommendations in place or is in the process of developing them. There is a general tendency to use the WHO Global Recommendations as a basis, with the greatest variation observable for children and adolescents. Comparing results with a previous round of data collection shows that the number of EU countries with physical activity recommendations is increasing and that both special groups and sedentary behaviour have become more important in recent years.

In the European Union (EU), the low levels of health-enhancing physical activity (HEPA) and high levels of sedentary behaviour are a concerning public health issue common to all Member States. In 2013, the Council of the EU recognized the need for more data related to HEPA to support policymaking across the region and proposed a monitoring framework that included 23 indicators covering different themes relevant to HEPA promotion in the EU context. In 2014, the EU Physical Activity Focal Points Network was established to support the implementation of the monitoring framework and in 2015 and 2018 surveys were conducted to collect epidemiological and policy information related to HEPA for each Member State. This paper aims to provide an update on the status of HEPA policies and surveillance in the EU and describe the changes that have occurred since 2015. In 2018, all countries had implemented more than 10 indicators, 8/28 had implemented 20 or more indicators, and only one country had completed all 23 indicators. From 2015 to 2018, 19 indicators improved, one remained unchanged, and three regressed. From the country perspective, 17 improved the number of accomplished indicators, five maintained the indicators, and five worsened the number of indicators. Overall, there has been a clear increase in the number of countries implementing HEPA policies and strategies across the different sectors, although some heterogeneity between Members Sates was still observed. Implementation of regional physical activity strategies and the establishment of the EU-wide monitoring framework appears to have had an overall positive impact on HEPA policy development and implementation.

Dietary health and sustainability are inextricably linked. Food systems that are not sustainable often fail to provide the amount or types of food needed to ensure population health. The ongoing pandemic threatens to exacerbate malnutrition, and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). This paper discusses threats and opportunities for food environments and health status across the WHO European Region in the current context. These opportunities and threats are focused around four key areas: NCDs and health systems; dietary behaviour; food insecurity and vulnerable groups; and food supply mechanisms. Food systems were already under great stress. Now with the pandemic, the challenges to food systems in the WHO European Region have been exacerbated, demanding from all levels of government swift adaptations to manage healthiness, availability, accessibility and affordability of food. Cities and governments in the Region should capitalize on this unique opportunity to 'build back better' and make bold and lasting changes to the food system and consequently to the health and wellbeing of people and sustainability of the planet.

Dietary health and sustainability are inextricably linked. Food systems that are not sustainable often fail to provide the amount or types of food needed to ensure population health. The ongoing pandemic threatens to exacerbate malnutrition, and noncommunicable diseases (NCDs). This paper discusses threats and opportunities for food environments and health status across the WHO European Region in the current context . These opportunities and threats are focused around four key areas: NCDs and health systems; dietary behaviour; food insecurity and vulnerable groups; and food supply mechanisms. Food systems were already under great stress. Now with the pandemic, the challenges to food systems in the WHO European Region have been exacerbated, demanding from all levels of government swift adaptations to manage healthiness, availability, accessibility and affordability of food. Cities and governments in the Region should capitalize on this unique opportunity to 'build back better' and make bold and lasting changes to the food system and consequently to the health and wellbeing of people and sustainability of the planet.

Removing trans fatty acids (TFAs) from the food supply in the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) are one of the most effective public health interventions for reducing the risk of noncommunicable diseases. EAEU Member States have taken important steps to reduce TFA in oil and fat products to <2% of the total fat content. The authors summarize existing policies in the region, identify challenges in implementation, and suggest measures to strengthen regulation to achieve compliance with WHO guidelines. Documents published between 2011 and 2019 in Russian and English were reviewed, including EAEU and Member State restrictions on TFA in food products, data on TFA content in foods, and food labeling policies. The EAEU has established TFA limits in oil and fat products; however, Member States are currently not achieving the WHO guideline of <2% of total fat content in food products. A lack of harmonized monitoring systems and sanctions create challenges in monitoring compliance. The authors recommend developing an EAEU‐wide monitoring system to test TFA content and organize population intake surveys. Discrepancies exist within regulatory frameworks that allow higher levels of TFAs in dairy products and infant formula. The authors recommend extending the current regulation to mandate TFA limits for all food products. Research found that strengthening regulation to meet the WHO guidelines should be prioritized. Member States should implement actions to replace TFAs with healthier fats, develop standardized surveillance methods, and scale‐up strategic communication to ensure the food industry and the public follow public health recommendations to protect the health of the EAEU population.

International audience ; Objectives The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. Results Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. Conclusions While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for other countries currently planning the development or update of national PA recommendations.

Objectives The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. Results Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. Conclusions While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for other countries currently ...

International audience ; Objectives The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. Results Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. Conclusions While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for ...

International audience ; Objectives The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. Results Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. Conclusions While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for ...

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. PARTICIPANTS: The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. OUTCOME MEASURES: From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. RESULTS: Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for other countries ...

International audience ; Objectives The aim of the study is to compare how member states of the European Union (EU) develop their national physical activity (PA) recommendations and to provide an overview of the methodologies they apply in doing so. Information was collected directly from the physical activity focal points of EU member states in 2018. Five countries were chosen for detailed case study analysis of development processes. Design Cross-sectional survey. Participants The representatives of the 28 EU member state governments to the EU physical activity Focal Point Network. Outcome measures From national documents we extracted data on (1) the participants of the development process, (2) the different methods used during development, and (3) on which sources national PA recommendations were based. An additional survey for case study countries provided details on (1) anonymised information on the participants of development process, (2) methods employed and rationale for choosing them, (3) development process and timeline, and (4) main source documents used for recommendation development. Results Eighteen national documents on PA recommendations contained information about development process. The results showed that countries used different approaches to develop national recommendations. The main strategies were (1) adoption of WHO 2010 recommendations or (2) a combination of analysis and adoption of other national and international recommendations and literature review. All of the five case study countries relied on review processes rather than directly adopting WHO recommendations. Conclusions While there are arguments for the use of particular strategies for PA recommendation development, there is currently no evidence for the general superiority of a specific approach. Instead, our findings highlight the broad spectrum of potential development methods, resources utilisation and final recommendations design currently available to national governments. These results may be a source of inspiration for ...