Perbedaan status gizi, kesegaran jasmani, dan kualitas hidup anak sekolah di pedesaan dan perkotaan

Maria Mexitalia; Hendriani Sellina; Mohammad Syarofil Anam; Aya Yoshimura; Taro Yamauchi; Nurkukuh Nurkukuh; Bambang Hariyana

doi:10.22146/ijcn.18216

Perbedaan status gizi, kesegaran jasmani, dan kualitas hidup anak sekolah di pedesaan dan perkotaan

https://doi.org/10.22146/ijcn.18216

Maria Mexitalia^(1*), Hendriani Sellina⁽²⁾, Mohammad Syarofil Anam⁽³⁾, Aya Yoshimura⁽⁴⁾, Taro Yamauchi⁽⁵⁾, Nurkukuh Nurkukuh⁽⁶⁾, Bambang Hariyana⁽⁷⁾

(1) Departemen Ilmu Kesehatan Anak Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro / Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Dr. Kariadi Semarang
(2) Departemen Ilmu Kesehatan Anak Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro / Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Dr. Kariadi Semarang
(3) Departemen Ilmu Kesehatan Anak Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro / Rumah Sakit Umum Pusat Dr. Kariadi Semarang
(4) Department of Human Ecology Faculty of Health Sciences, Hokkaido University, Japan, Kitaku Sapporosi Hokkaido Japan
(5) Department of Human Ecology Faculty of Health Sciences, Hokkaido University, Japan, Kitaku Sapporosi Hokkaido Japan
(6) Laboratorium Ilmu Kesehatan Masyarakat Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro
(7) Laboratorium Ilmu Kesehatan Masyarakat Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Diponegoro
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract

Background: The differences in geographic, sosioeconomic and lifestyle between children in rural and urban areas infl uence their nutritional status. The urban children tended to be less active. The evidence suggested that physical activity improves cardiorespiratory fi tness and mental health in young people but study that compare those indicators among rural and urban children was scarce.

Objective: To compare the nutritional status, physical fi tness, and quality of life between elementary school children in rural and urban areas.

Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted at Semarang (urban) and Mlonggo (rural) Central Java in 2009. Inclusion criteria was school children aged 9-11 years and had no physical disability. Body composition was measured by Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis, physical activity by Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ), physical fi tness by 20-m shuttle run test and quality of life by Pediatrics Quality of Life Questionnaire (PedQoL 4.0). The differences between nutritional status and physical activity were assessed by Chi Square test, while the differences between physical fi tness and quality of life were tested by independent t test (p<0.05).

Result: One hundred sixty-two subjects were enrolled in the study (Semarang 82 students; 36 boys, 46 girls and Mlonggo 80 students; 40 boys, 40 girls). Body mass index (18.97 vs 15.16 kg/m2) and body fat (26.03% vs 18.03%) of urban children were higher than that of the rural’s (p<0.001). Children in rural area were signifi cantly more active, have higher physical fi tness level (VO2 max 28.54±1.79 ml/kg/min vs 21.57+1.79 ml/kg/min) (p<0.01), and have higher score in quality of life (2243 + 295,8) compared to the children from urban area (2133 + 369.4) (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Rural school children have lower nutritional status than urban children, but they are more active and have higher physical fi tness level. They also have better quality of life.

Keywords

nutritional status; physical activity; physical fitness; quality of life; school age children

Full Text:

PDF

References

Li J, Stanley F, McMurray A, Hertzman C, Mattes E. Social determinants of child health and well-being. Health Soc Rev 2009;18(1):3-11.

Daryanto A. Disparitas pembangunan perkotaan- pedesaan di Indonesia. Agrimedia 2003;8(2):30-9.

Ganong L, Beckmeyer J, Benson J, Jamison T, McCaulley G, Sutton E. Poverty in American: rural and urban differences. [serial online] 2007 [cited 2011 March 12]. Avaliable from: http://missourifamilies.org/cfb/briefs/ruralurban.pdf.

Kennedy G, Nantel G, Brouwer ID, Kok FJ. Does living in an urban environment confer advantages for childhood nutritional status? analysis of disparities in nutritional status by wealth and residence in Angola, Central African Republic and Senegal. Public Health Nutr 2006;9(2):187-93.

Anwer I, Awan JA. Nutritional status comparison of rural with urban school children in Faisalabad District, Pakistan. Rural Remote Health [serial online] 2003 [cited 2011 March 12];3(1):130. Avaliable from: http:// rrh.deakin.edu.au.

de Vries SI, Bakker I, van Mechelen W, Hopman-Rock M. Determinants of activity-friendly neighborhoods for children: results from the SPACE study. Am J Health Promot 2007;21(4):312-6.

Woo KS, Chook P, Yu CW, Sung RYT, Qiao M, Leung SS, Lam CW, Metreweli C, Celermajer DS. Effects of diet and exercise on obesity-related vascular dysfunction in children. Circulation 2004;109(16):1981-6.

Izutsu T, Tsutsumi A, Islam AM, Kato S, Wakai S, Kurita H. Mental health, quality of life, and nutritional status of adolescents in Dhaka, Bangladesh: comparison between an urban slum and a non-slum area. Soc Sci Med 2006;63(6):1477-88.

Belizzi MC, Dietz WH. Workshop on childhood obesity: summary of the discussion. Am J Clin Nutr 1999;70(1):173S-5S.

WHO. Physical status: the use and interpretation of anthropometry. WHO: Geneva; 1995.

Armstrong T, Bull F. Development of a short global physical activity questionnaire (GPAG) for use in developing countries. Geneva: WHO; 2003.

Shvartz E, Reibold RC. Aerobic fitness norms for males and females aged 6-75: a review. Aviat Space Environ Med 1990;61(1):3-11.

Hodgkin E, Hamlin MJ, Ross JJ, Peters F. Obesity, energy intake and physical activity in rural and urban New Zealand children. Rural Remote Health 2010;10(2):1336.

Loucaides CA, Chedzoy SM, Bennett N. Differences in physical activity levels between urban and rural school children in Cyprus. Health Educ Res 2004;19(2):138-47.

Joens-Matre RR, Welk GJ, Calabro MA, Russell DW, Nicklay E, Hensley LD. Rural–urban differences in physical activity, physical fitness, and overweight prevalence of children. J Rural Health 2008;24(1):49-54.

Gill M, Deol NS, Kaur R. Comparative study of physical fitness components of rural and urban female students of Punjabi University, Patiala. Anthropologist 2010;12(1):17-21.

Tsimeas PD, Tsiokanos AL, Koutedakis Y, Tsigilis N, Kellis S. Does living in urban or rural settings affect aspects of physical fitness in children? an allometric approach. Br J Sports Med 2005;39(9):671-4.

Shucksmith M, Cameron S, Merridew T. First European quality of life survey: urban–rural differences. Denmark: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions; 2006.

Weinert C, Burman ME. Rural health and health- seeking behaviors. Annu Rev Nurs Res 1994;12:65-92.

Tsai WL, Yang CY, Lin SF, Fang FM. Impact of obesity on medical problems and quality of life in Taiwan. Am J Epidemiol 2004;160(6):557-65.

Janicke DM, Marciel KK, Ingerski LM, Novoa W, Lowry KW, Sallinen BJ, Silverstein JH. Impact of psychosocial factors on quality of life in overweight youth. Obesity 2007;15(7):1799-807.

Friedlander SL, Larkin EK, Rosen CL, Palermo TM, Redline S. Decreased quality of life associated with obesity in school-ages children. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2003;157(12):1206-11.

Cherry DC, Huggins B, Gilmore K. Children’s health in the rural environment. Pediatr Clin North Am 2007;54(1):121-33.

Yang RK, Fetsch RJ. The self-esteem of rural children. J Res Rural Educ 2007;22(5):1-7.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/ijcn.18216