No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Occupational sitting time: Employees'perceptions of health risks and intervention strategies
Abstract
There is increasing interest in the potential association between sedentary behaviour and poor health. This study examined office-based employees' perceptions of the health risks associated with prolonged sitting at work, and strategies to interrupt and reduce occupational sitting time.
Four focus groups were conducted with a convenience sample of Australian government personnel (20 women and two men). Open-ended questions concerning health risks and sitting reduction strategies were posed by lead researchers and focus group participants invited to express opinions, viewpoints and experiences. Audio recordings and summary notes of focus group discussions were reviewed by researchers to identify key response themes.
Employees associated prolonged occupational sitting with poor health, primarily in terms of musculoskeletal issues, fatigue and de-motivation.This risk was seen as independent of physical activity. Workplace interventions tailored to occupational roles were viewed as important and considered to be the joint responsibility of individuals and organisations. Strategies included workload planning (interspersing sedentary and non-sedentary tasks), environmental change (e.g. stairwell access, printers away from desks), work tasks on the move (e.g. walking meetings) and purposive physical activity (e.g. periodic breaks, exercise/walking groups).The perception that these strategies would compromise productivity was identified as the primary barrier to implementation; team leaders were subsequently considered vital in enabling integration and acceptance of strategies into everyday workplace practices.
Prolonged occupational sitting was perceived as detrimental to health. Suggested strategies targeted individuals, workplaces, organisations and environments.
... Nonetheless, women were more motivated by communication and togetherness as they were more likely to engage in physical activities with colleagues or in classes led by a specialist. Similarly, as in Gilson et al. research, where several employees noted that exercising classes during or after business hours would motivate them to be more active [22]. ...
... Some researchers have reported that between 33% and 50% respondents named 'lack of time' as the main obstacle to involvement in physical activity at work [25,26], and 21% due to heavy workload [25]. In addition, some respondents noted that it is hard to break concentration by standing up for a job that requires strong focus [22]. ...
... Several researchers have found that employees fear being judged by their colleagues, penalised for not being productive or receiving a negative reaction from their managers, thus discouraging them from standing up and being active in the workplace. Many participants disclosed that by taking breaks they would be perceived as having questionable work ethics [21,22,24,27]. Nevertheless, remote workers agreed more that they would be motivated to be physically active by specialist-led classes, but the question arose, where those classes would take place as individual classes at each employee's home would be too expensive for employers. ...
The office workplace is considered a significant risk setting for long-term sedentary behaviour, which can lead to various adverse health consequences. Therefore, this article examines the obstacles and external factors that motivate office workers, who spend a significant part of their workday sitting, to engage in physical activity. This cross-sectional study analysed data from an anonymous survey of 232 Latvian office workers. Our results indicated that most respondents would be motivated to engage in physical activity during working hours, if employer provided motivational system (mean score 4.04 out of maximal 5 points), a specialist-led physical activity classes (4.01) or exercising together with colleagues (3.91) would be implemented at their workplace. Respondents in the following subgroups agreed more that employer provided motivational system would encourage them to be more physical activity at work: all age groups (between 3.93 and 4.18), both ‘time of sitting’ subgroups (between 4.00 and 4.07), men (3.93) and in-office workers (4.07). However, women (4.06) and remote workers (4.08) agreed more, that physical activity classes led by a specialist would be the most motivational. In contrast, highly intense work tasks were the main barrier for office workers not to be involved in physical activities at work, as it was the obstacle for 59% of the respondents. These findings can be helpful in implementing and organising health promotion interventions for office workers.
... Research to date has shown that excessive occupational sitting is a major health risk that can increase the risk of chronic conditions such as hypertension and stroke (Bennie et al., 2013;De Cocker et al., 2014, 2014Gilson et al., 2011). Occupational sitting increases the risk of physical inactivity Gilson et al., 2011;Loyen et al., 2018;Müller et al., 2020), which is a leading cause of the above long-term conditions and mortality (Albert et al., 2020;Legh-Jones and Moore, 2012). ...
... Research to date has shown that excessive occupational sitting is a major health risk that can increase the risk of chronic conditions such as hypertension and stroke (Bennie et al., 2013;De Cocker et al., 2014, 2014Gilson et al., 2011). Occupational sitting increases the risk of physical inactivity Gilson et al., 2011;Loyen et al., 2018;Müller et al., 2020), which is a leading cause of the above long-term conditions and mortality (Albert et al., 2020;Legh-Jones and Moore, 2012). Occupational sitting time is the amount of time spent by employees sitting to perform job-related tasks Yang et al., 2017). ...
... As a health risk factor that can cause low productivity (Gilson et al., 2011;Van Uffelen et al., 2010), occupational sitting must be discouraged among employees; discouraging occupational sitting enables employees to keep active and maintain health as well as productivity. In the extant literature, organizations reduce the risk of occupational sitting by adopting and rolling out workplace health promotion programmes . ...
Many studies have identified personal factors associated with occupational sitting time, but none of them focused on the longest episode of occupational sitting (hereby referred to as continuous occupational sitting time) nor considered whether workplace support for health moderates the associations between these factors and continuous occupational sitting time. This study aimed to identify personal factors predicting continuous occupational sitting time and ascertained whether workplace support for health moderates the associations between these factors and continuous occupational sitting time. A cross-sectional design and an adapted hierarchical linear regression analysis was employed. The participants were 991 employees of public and private organizations in Accra, Ghana. Results were presented with hierarchical linear regression analysis. The ultimate predictors of continuous occupational sitting time at a minimum of p < 0.05 include age, job type, and job income. Workplace support for health significantly moderated the primary associations, which means that workplace support for health altered the strength of the associations between all predictors (except tenure) and continuous occupational sitting time. This study concludes that there are inequalities in continuous occupational sitting time between employee groups that can be modified by workplace support for health.
... 15 However, less evidence available to inform the stakeholders about the knowledge, attitude and practice of reducing SB or promoting PA at Indian workplaces and to develop interventions based on the deficits identified from the informed knowledge or practice in Indian workplaces. Inspite of increasing evidence, the increasing workplace SB may be probably due to the difference in knowledge and practices among employers and employees in Australia 10, 16 and Belgium. 11 A relatively recent systematic review by Shrestha et al, 2018, found that organizational policies such as advocating sit-stand workstations, short breaks, information, and counseling reduce sitting time by -57 ± 42 min, -17 ± 44 min, -55 ± 41 min respectively on short and medium follow-up. ...
... 19 While, substantial evidence exists for the first two phases, [20][21][22] only a few studies attempted to establish the correlates for SB, or PA practices at workplaces. 10,11,16,23 Gathering information on predictors, facilitators of occupational sitting time and barriers to SB and PA practices at workplaces are necessary to inform stakeholders, intervention developers, and policymakers for efficient worksite health promotion. 24 There is a dearth of literature available to map the individual, organizational and environmental factors with the existing TDF and BCW domains. ...
... A semi-structured questionnaire, "Knowledge, Attitude and Practice of Physical Activity Questionnaire" (KAPPA-Q) was developed by two authors (AS and BC) based on the earlier literature to identify various sedentary patterns, risk factors, practice, beliefs about being sedentary, and organizational structure. 10,11,16,24,25 The constructs of the knowledge, attitude, practice and environmental domains were guided by the earlier literature that investigated the socio-cultural and psychological constructs of occupational SB in Australian 10,16 and Belgium desk-based workers. 11 Table 1 shows the elicited questions for finding the barriers and facilitators of SB and PA interventions at the workplaces. ...
The knowledge, attitude and practices of employees and employers toward reducing sedentary behavior (SB) and improving physical activity (PA) at Indian workplaces remain unclear. A bespoke questionnaire assessing barriers and facilitators of occupational SB and PA practices as informed by the theoretical framework and behavioral change wheel model was adapted. Two hundred and three white-collar workers (both employees and managers) from eight corporate sectors were inquired about the SB, and PA practices at workplaces. The dichotomous variables of barriers and facilitators were analyzed by nonparametric tests. Excessive sitters had good knowledge (>75%), good attitude (>85%) but poor workplace SB and PA practice (>90%). Workplace SB, or PA practices differed between employers and employees. Low practice of workplace PA or SB interventions may be due to lack of workplace policies for SB interventions.
... Three qualitative studies were included, with two investigating employee attitudes toward sitting reduction strategies, including elements of active design [37,38], and one pilot study evaluating facilitators of and barriers to movement [29]. Hadgraft et al. (2016) conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 employees and managers from a range of industries [38], while Gilson et al. (2011) performed focus groups [37]. ...
... Three qualitative studies were included, with two investigating employee attitudes toward sitting reduction strategies, including elements of active design [37,38], and one pilot study evaluating facilitators of and barriers to movement [29]. Hadgraft et al. (2016) conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 employees and managers from a range of industries [38], while Gilson et al. (2011) performed focus groups [37]. McGann et al. (2014) used ethnographic fieldwork methods to study the movement patterns of 90 government employees [29]. ...
... Three qualitative studies were included, with two investigating employee attitudes toward sitting reduction strategies, including elements of active design [37,38], and one pilot study evaluating facilitators of and barriers to movement [29]. Hadgraft et al. (2016) conducted semi-structured interviews with 20 employees and managers from a range of industries [38], while Gilson et al. (2011) performed focus groups [37]. McGann et al. (2014) used ethnographic fieldwork methods to study the movement patterns of 90 government employees [29]. ...
Active design is an emerging concept to incorporate physical activity into daily life through thoughtful design, and is often implemented in new building designs. It is, however, not known what evidence base there is to support the claims. Through this systematic review, the current evidence for active design was investigated. Seven databases were searched. A range of search terms relating to active design, physical activity, sitting, performance and wellbeing were used. After title and abstract screening of 1174 papers and full-text screening, 17 were selected for inclusion. The papers provided promising evidence of active design aiding a reduction in sitting and increase in standing time. Limited evidence was found for physical activity; a few studies reported an increase in step counts. Musculoskeletal effects were investigated in few studies, but there is some evidence of benefits to lower back pain. There was consistent evidence for better light and air quality, but no evidence for other features of the workplace environment. No conclusive evidence was found on associations between active design features and work performance. There is hence some evidence to support the benefit of active design on physical health; however, the dearth and heterogeneity of the study designs, measures and findings warrant further research.
... In one rare example from the literature in the field of interest to this current study, Gilson et al. (2011) conducted focus groups with Australian office workers to explore their perceptions of the health issues linked with long periods of sitting and to actively seek practical suggestions for ways to reduce sedentary behaviour. They found that workers did recognise the health risks associated with long periods of sitting and could suggest practical actions to mitigate the risk. ...
... However, they also feared that their productivity would be damaged by these actions and that, without leadership support, their suggested changes would not be successfully implemented. Gilson et al. (2011) showed the importance of asking workers to share their perceptions, ideas and opinions. The workers showed that they understood that not taking breaks could be associated with health risks. ...
... This shows the complexity underlying what at face value might seem to be a straightforward issue: take breaks and reduce your health risks. Our study builds on the approach taken by Gilson et al. (2011) and seeks to invite office-based workers to share their experiences and perceptions about taking breaks at work. ...
Objective: There is a growing trend whereby office workers refrain from taking breaks at work. Previous research has not explored how employees understand the enablers and barriers to taking breaks. This study explored how office-based workers describe their behaviour in relation to, and perceive the notion of, taking breaks.
Design: Five focus groups were held with 27 employees of differing levels of seniority at a local authority in the UK. Inductive thematic analysis was employed with the researchers maintaining a deliberate stance of curiosity towards the data, allowing for reflexivity and awareness of preconceptions towards the research.
Results: The analysis identified 5 key themes: the non-binary nature of taking breaks at work, the influence of social and work relationships, the superordination of work over breaks and health, contradictory feelings of guilt and anxiety and being ‘fair game’ for work related matters if you remain at your desk at break times.
Conclusion: This paper suggests that the complex relationships that people have with taking breaks, with others and with their physical environment should be taken into account when trying to understand break-taking behaviour. Based on these findings, suggestions for further research and potential health-related policy and organisational changes are made.
... 16,18 Perceptions that reducing sitting time would result in reduced work productivity or break concentration have been commonly reported. 18,[20][21][22] While, barriers related to organisational culture and what is considered ''normal'' workplace behavior are prominent. Specifically, participants have reported a fear of being judged by others as unproductive if they were away from their desk. ...
... 16,17 That the cultural norm of the workplace restricts being away from a desk and this constrains the employee to be able to engage in strategies that can reduce prolonged sitting, 18,20 -22 and a general sense that management/the employer does not support taking breaks from sitting. 16,21,22 More personally, individuals report feeling that standing would disrupt others 17 and they would feel self-conscious if they stood. 17,20 This previous research has focused on barriers associated with reducing total sedentary time usually by spending more time standing, rather than barriers to interrupting periods of prolonged sitting by performing light to moderate intensity activity breaks. ...
... Similarly, research that has identified facilitators to reducing sedentary time have also focused on how participants could spend more time standing rather than doing light to moderate intensity activity. These facilitators include having a purpose for standing up, for example, talking to a colleague or going to a printer, 21 specifically planning work tasks to include breaks from sitting [20][21][22] and feeling relief from the negative physical and mental effects of sitting. 21 A prominent facilitator is a workplace culture that does not restrict taking breaks from sitting, 16,21 where the employer supports and encourages staff to stand, and challenges the notion that productivity will be compromised. ...
Objective:
To understand the practicalities of undertaking 2-3 min of light to moderate intensity physical activity after every 30 min of prolonged sitting by examining barriers and facilitators.
Methods:
27 (n = 22 women) employees working in higher education who sat for ≥ 5 hours during a work day participated in a focus group discussion.
Results:
Through inductive thematic analysis, themes characterising workplace culture and having the knowledge (or not) of benefits were found to be a facilitator and a barrier. Additional barriers were a perceived reduction in work productivity and specific work tasks that precluded taking activity breaks. Extrinsic motivators and prompts were suggested to facilitate participation.
Conclusions:
Environmental and individual strategies are required to build capability, opportunity and motivation for undertaking regular activity breaks and should inform the development of an ecologically valid workplace intervention.
... While physiologists in 1969 recommended performing more work sitting to lower the physical effort [82], more recent research has identified health risks of physical inactivity [248]. Sjøl et al. [226] showed a relationship between increased risk of myocardial infarction and physical inactivity, and Gilson et al. [80] showed a relation between occupational sitting and musculoskeletal issues and stress. These authors argued for more moving while performing work. ...
... This will allow users to work in different postures. Changing the posture from time to time can have a positive influence on creativity, attention, health and well-being [80]. ...
... Furthermore, these gesture sets have the potential to motivate the user to more physical movement while interacting with content displayed on an LHRD. Thereby the usage of these gestures could have a positive well-being effect [80]. Additionally, we analyzed the influence of the legacy bias [179] on the proposed gestures. ...
... While physiologists in 1969 recommended performing more work sitting to lower the physical effort [82], more recent research has identified health risks of physical inactivity [248]. Sjøl et al. [226] showed a relationship between increased risk of myocardial infarction and physical inactivity, and Gilson et al. [80] showed a relation between occupational sitting and musculoskeletal issues and stress. These authors argued for more moving while performing work. ...
... This will allow users to work in different postures. Changing the posture from time to time can have a positive influence on creativity, attention, health and well-being [80]. ...
... Furthermore, these gesture sets have the potential to motivate the user to more physical movement while interacting with content displayed on an LHRD. Thereby the usage of these gestures could have a positive well-being effect [80]. Additionally, we analyzed the influence of the legacy bias [179] on the proposed gestures. ...
Large visual spaces provide a unique opportunity to communicate
large and complex pieces of information; hence, they have been
used for hundreds of years for varied content including maps, public
notifications and artwork. Understanding and evaluating complex
information will become a fundamental part of any office work. Large
high-resolution displays (LHRDs) have the potential to further enhance
the traditional advantages of large visual spaces and combine them
with modern computing technology, thus becoming an essential tool for understanding and communicating data in future office environments. For successful deployment of LHRDs in office environments, well-suited interaction concepts are required.
In this thesis, we build an understanding of how concepts for interaction with LHRDs in office environments could be designed. From the human-computer interaction (HCI) perspective three aspects are fundamental: (1) The way humans perceive and react to large visual spaces is essential for interaction with content displayed on LHRDs. (2) LHRDs require adequate input techniques. (3) The actual content requires well-designed graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and suitable input techniques. Perceptions influence how users can perform input on LHRD setups, which sets boundaries for the design of GUIs for LHRDs. Furthermore, the input technique has to be reflected in the design of the GUI.
... Given the potential hazards associated with prolonged sitting at work and physical inactivity, including increased stress and occupational pain (17)(18)(19), it is imperative to examine workplace interventions that can mitigate these behaviors and promote overall health and well-being (20). The literature has mainly proposed two types of active breaks to interrupt sedentary behavior in desk-based workers: "Booster Breaks" (B-B) and "Computer Prompts" (C-P) (21)(22)(23). ...
... With the implementation of this tool, we will be able to assess both the general and specific pain experienced by participants in the workplace. This method provides a comprehensive evaluation of the prevalence and severity of musculoskeletal pain, enabling a thorough analysis of the overall impact on employees' well-being (18,66,67 ...
Background
Excessive sedentary time has been negatively associated with several health outcomes, and physical activity alone does not seem to fully counteract these consequences. This panorama emphasizes the essential of sedentary time interruption programs. “The Up Project” seeks to assess the effectiveness of two interventions, one incorporating active breaks led by a professional and the other utilizing a computer application (self-led), of both equivalent duration and intensity. These interventions will be compared with a control group to evaluate their impact on physical activity levels, sedentary time, stress perception, occupational pain, and cardiometabolic risk factors among office workers.
Methods
This quasi-experimental study includes 60 desk-based workers from universities and educational institutes in Valparaiso, Chile, assigned to three groups: (a) booster breaks led by professionals, (b) computer prompts that are unled, and (c) a control group. The intervention protocol for both experimental groups will last 12 weeks (only weekdays). The following measurements will be performed at baseline and post-intervention: cardiometabolic risk based on body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, and bone mass evaluated by DXA), waist circumference, blood pressure, resting heart rate, and handgrip strength. Physical activity and sedentary time will be self-reported and device-based assessed using accelerometry. Questionnaires will be used to determine the perception of stress and occupational pain.
Discussion
Governments worldwide are addressing health issues associated with sedentary behavior, particularly concerning individuals highly exposed to it, such as desk-based workers. Despite implementing certain strategies, there remains a noticeable gap in comprehensive research comparing diverse protocols. For instance, studies that contrast the outcomes of interventions led by professionals with those prompted by computers are scarce. This ongoing project is expected to contribute to evidence-based interventions targeting reduced perceived stress levels and enhancing desk-based employees’ mental and physical well-being. The implications of these findings could have the capacity to lay the groundwork for future public health initiatives and government-funded programs.
... These findings concurred across all focus groups, suggesting this feeling was present regardless of the organisation employing individuals, and whether they have access to a sit-stand desk or not. Workplace office culture has previously been cited as important, with managerial support and 'champions' for change deemed vital in promoting uptake and adherence to sit-less interventions Gilson et al., 2011;Morris et al., 2019). This has been previously reported by seated-desk workers, or those following a research-led intervention. ...
... Managerial support was found to be important to cultivate a supportive culture and to facilitate change, aligning with previous research Chau et al., 2014;Gilson et al., 2011;Morris et al., 2020). Notably, our study reveals a shift in culture over time, suggesting that sit-stand desks can become normalized. ...
Prolonged sedentary behaviour is associated with poor health. Office-based workers spend much of the working day sitting. Sit-stand desks have become a popular intervention, but real-life experiences of the value of sit-stand desks remain relatively unexplored outside of research-led interventions. A qualitative study was therefore undertaken to explore real-life experiences, including perceived barriers, and facilitators of using sit-stand desks. Six focus-group interviews were undertaken with a total of 34 desk-based employees in North-West England. Interviews were transcribed and analysed using thematic analysis. Three main themes emerged: The Sedentary Office, Motivators, and The Active Office. The Sedentary Office highlighted participants’ frustration with an increasingly sedentary office environment. Motivators to reducing sitting time were knowledge of the health consequences of prolonged sitting, previous (ill) health, and the potential benefits expected. The Active Office highlighted the importance of control, choice, enhanced interaction with colleagues, and the benefits associated with moving more and enhancing an overall sense of workplace wellbeing. Perceived benefits, facilitators, and barriers - experienced and observed – from sit-stand desk use in the real world were examined, thus contributing to important discussions of transferability. Overall, the study shed light on the perceived facilitators, benefits, and drawbacks of sit-stand desk work whilst also giving evidence of the real-world acceptability and research translation of sit-stand desk use. Future research should examine this in multiple contexts and should explore implications of an increasing prevalence in home working.
... Given the potential hazards associated with prolonged sitting at work and physical inactivity, including increased stress and occupational pain (16)(17)(18), it is imperative to examine workplace interventions that can mitigate these behaviors and promote overall health and well-being (19). The literature has mainly proposed two types of active breaks to interrupt sedentary behavior in desk-based workers: "Booster Breaks" (B-B) and "Computer Prompts" (C-P) (20)(21)(22). ...
... With the implementation of this tool, we will be able to assess both the general and specific pain experienced by participants in the workplace. This method provides a comprehensive evaluation of the prevalence and severity of musculoskeletal pain, enabling a thorough analysis of the overall impact on employees' well-being (17,46,47). ...
Background: Excessive sedentary time has been negatively associated with several health outcomes, and physical activity alone does not seem to fully counteract these consequences. This panorama emphasizes the essential of sedentary time interruption programs. "The Up Project" seeks to assess the effectiveness of two interventions, one incorporating active breaks led by a professional and the other utilizing a computer application (self-led), of both equivalent duration and intensity. These interventions will be compared with a control group to evaluate their impact on physical activity levels, sedentary time, stress perception, occupational pain, and cardiometabolic risk factors among office workers.
Methods: This quasi-experimental study includes 60 desk-based workers from universities and educational institutes in Valparaiso, Chile, assigned to three groups: a) booster breaks led by professionals, b) computer prompts that are unled, and c) a control group. The intervention protocol for both experimental groups will last 12 weeks (only weekdays). The following measurements will be performed at baseline and post-intervention: cardiometabolic risk based on body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, and bone mass evaluated by DXA), waist circumference, blood pressure, and resting heart rate. Physical activity and sedentary time will be self-reported and objectively assessed using accelerometry. Questionnaires will be used to determine the perception of stress and occupational pain.
Discussion: Governments worldwide are addressing health issues associated with sedentary behavior, particularly concerning individuals highly exposed to it, such as desk-based workers. Despite implementing certain strategies, there remains a noticeable gap in comprehensive research comparing diverse protocols. For instance, studies that contrast the outcomes of interventions led by professionals with those prompted by computers are scarce. This ongoing project is expected to contribute to evidence-based interventions targeting reduced perceived stress levels and enhancing desk-based employees' mental and physical well-being. The implications of these findings could have the capacity to lay the groundwork for future public health initiatives and government-funded.
... In light of the detrimental health effects of high levels of sedentary behavior, public health researchers have committed considerable efforts toward interventions designed to reduce sedentary behavior, particularly among office workers. However, ensuring that reductions in sedentary behavior will not damage productivity is likely to be important for employer buy-in, particularly given that employees in focus groups have voiced concerns about the potential for decreased productivity in the wake of interventions targeting sedentary behavior in the workplace [11,12]. Workplace health practitioners have also indicated productivity concerns as the key barrier to making changes in the workplace [13]. ...
... Additionally, office workers in the lowest level of time spent sitting reported higher job satisfaction and lower fatigue as compared with those in the highest level of time spent sitting. Because previous research suggests that productivity concerns are a key barrier to implementing changes in the workplace that may decrease sedentary behavior, results from the current study may be interpreted positively with respect to alleviating employer concerns related to reducing sedentary behavior for their employees [11][12][13]. ...
Reducing sedentary behavior in the workplace has become an important public health priority; however, some employers have expressed concerns regarding the potential for reduced productivity if employees are not seated while at work. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine the relationship between workplace sedentary behavior (sitting time) and work productivity among full-time office-based employees, and further to investigate other potential factors associated with productivity. A 19-item online self-report survey was completed by 2068 government employees in Kansas. The survey assessed workplace sedentary behavior, work productivity, job satisfaction, and fatigue. Overall, office workers reported high levels of sedentary time (mean > 78%). The primary results indicated that sitting time was not significantly associated with productivity (β = 0.013, p = 0.519), but job satisfaction and fatigue were positively (β = 0.473, p < 0.001) and negatively (β = −0.047, p = 0.023) associated with productivity, respectively. Furthermore, participants with the highest level of sitting time (>91% of the time) reported lower job satisfaction and greater fatigue as compared with the lowest level of sitting time (<75% of the time). Taken together, these results offer promising support that less sitting time is associated with positive outcomes that do not seem to come at the expense of productivity.
... With links to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and premature mortality (Biswas et al., 2015), too much sitting is recognised as a public health concern, especially in adults who are inactive (Gilson et al., 2011;Ekelund et al., 2016), with the office workplace identified as a key setting in which to address this ubiquitous behaviour (Gilson et al., 2011;Healy et al., 2012). Most office workers spend at least 4-6 h per day seated at a desk (Ryde et al., 2014). ...
... With links to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and premature mortality (Biswas et al., 2015), too much sitting is recognised as a public health concern, especially in adults who are inactive (Gilson et al., 2011;Ekelund et al., 2016), with the office workplace identified as a key setting in which to address this ubiquitous behaviour (Gilson et al., 2011;Healy et al., 2012). Most office workers spend at least 4-6 h per day seated at a desk (Ryde et al., 2014). ...
The aim of this study was to compare the feasibility and impact of sit-stand workstations plus advice, with or without exercise, on back pain and sitting time in office workers at risk of low back pain (LBP). Eligible participants (n = 29/169; 17% overall) were randomized to receive a sit-stand workstation and advice with (n = 16) or without (n = 13) progressive resistance exercise training for 4-weeks. Feasibility (recruitment, acceptability, adherence) and impact (LBP severity during a standardized standing task, workplace-sitting time) were assessed. Intervention acceptability (87.5% very satisfied) was good and adherence (60% completed all 12 exercise sessions) was satisfactory. Maximum LBP severity (mean difference of −1.3 (−2.0, −0.6) and workplace sitting time (82.7–99.3 min/8-hr workday reduction) were similarly reduced in both groups. The introduction of a sit-stand workstation with advice was feasible and achieved similar outcomes for LBP and workplace sitting time when administered with or without exercise.
... Most commonly reported were environmental modifications (such as sit-stand workstations or standing meeting rooms), or educational/awareness initiatives highlighting the negative It' s how you manage your workload on a daily basis." Employee, non-intervention study [28] Work-related Barriers Barriers -Work requires the use of a computer (and seated posture) -Work has become more sedentary due to increasing use of technology -Some roles more sedentary than others -Employee/manager perception that taking breaks interrupts work flow/affects productivity -Perception that cognitive work requires people to be sitting down -Caught up in worknot noticing prolonged sitting -Home working and flexi-time strategies lead to more sitting -Shift work as a barrier to being active -Screen based work -Some job roles not considered appropriate to perform standing (e.g. receptionist) -Some tasks difficult to perform standing -Work load and time pressures limit ability to take breaks or engage with strategies considered an "interruption" to work tasks -Perception that taking more breaks away from workstation equals not meeting demands of the job -Concern about privacy of work when standing Computer-based work: "Today we sit down in front of that computer screen regularly for a good portion of a day to do training, to do reports, research whatever it may be, and so the number of hours your ass is in a chair has increased." ...
... So even though the bell's a really good idea, the fact that the bell rings again and 'Oh god, here we go'." Employee [28] Some participants also suggested strategies designed to increase physical activity, including promoting active travel, having a gym onsite, and running lunchtime exercise programs. ...
Background:
Reducing workplace sedentary behaviour (sitting) is a topic of contemporary public health and occupational health interest. Understanding workers' perspectives on the feasibility and acceptability of strategies, and barriers and facilitators to reducing workplace sitting time, can help inform the design and implementation of targeted interventions. The aim of this qualitative synthesis was to identify and synthesise the evidence on factors perceived to influence the acceptability and feasibility of reducing sitting at work, without, and with, an associated intervention component.
Methods:
A systematic search of the peer-reviewed literature was conducted across multiple databases in October 2017 to identify studies with a qualitative component relating to reducing workplace sitting time. Relevant data were extracted and imported into NVivo, and analysed by three of the authors by coding the results sections of papers line-by-line, with codes organised into sub-themes and then into overarching themes. Studies with and without an associated intervention were analysed separately.
Results:
Thirty-two studies met the inclusion criteria, 22 of which had collected qualitative data during and/or following a workplace intervention. Sample sizes ranged from five through to 71 participants. Studies predominately involved desk-based workers (28/32) and were most frequently conducted in Australia, USA or the United Kingdom (26/32). Similar themes were identified across non-intervention and intervention studies, particularly relating to barriers and facilitators to reducing workplace sitting. Predominately, work and social environment attributes were identified as barriers/facilitators, with desk-based work and work pressures influencing the perceived feasibility of reducing sitting, particularly for low-cost interventions. Support from co-workers and managers was considered a key facilitator to reducing sitting, while social norms that discouraged movement were a prominent barrier. Across all studies, some consistent perceptions of benefits to reducing sitting were identified, including improved physical health, enhanced emotional well-being and associated work-related benefits.
Conclusion:
Common barriers and facilitators to reducing workplace sitting time were identified across the literature, most prominently involving the social environment and job-related demands. These findings can inform the design and implementation of workplace sitting reduction strategies. To increase the generalisability of findings, further research is needed in a more diverse range of countries and industries.
... This systematic review showed that multicomponent interventions, including sit-stand desks, can effectively reduce sedentary behavior, aligning with previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Danquah et al., 2017;Healy et al., 2016;Neuhaus, Eakin, et al., 2014;Zhou et al., 2023). The observed positive impact may be associated with the collaborative nature of these interventions, where exposure to colleagues' behaviors influence adherence to change (Gilson et al., 2011;Healy et al., 2016). Singlecomponent interventions showed smaller reductions in sedentary behavior compared to multicomponent interventions. ...
Objective
To gather the existing evidence on the impact of sit-stand desk-based interventions on working-time and full-day sedentary behavior and compare their impact across different intervention lengths.
Background
Reducing sedentary behavior is vital for improving office workers’ health. Sit-stand desks promote sitting and standing alternation, but understanding their effects outside the workplace is essential for success.
Methods
Studies published between January 2008 and January 2024 were searched through electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library). The quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies of the Effective Public Health Practice Project.
Results
Twelve included studies showed that the intervention group experienced average reductions in full-day sedentary behavior of 68.7 min/day at 3 months, 77.7 min/day at 6 months, and 62.1 min/day at 12 months compared to the control group. For working hours sedentary behavior, reductions were observed in the intervention group at 9 weeks (73.0 min/day), 3 months (88.0 min/day), 6 months (80.8 min/day), and 12 months (48.0 min/day) relative to the control group.
Conclusions
Sit-stand desk interventions can be effective in helping office workers reduce sedentary behavior in the short, medium, and long-term both at work and throughout the full-day.
Application
Active workstation interventions, including sit-stand desks, educational sessions, and alert software, aim to reduce sedentary behavior among office workers. While sit-stand desks show promise in decreasing sitting time during working hours, their long-term effectiveness and impact beyond the workplace remain uncertain. This review evaluates their effectiveness across different durations, addressing both workplace and full-day impact.
... The extant literature suggests that physical activity differs across the employee's industry [i.e., service vs. manufacturing firms] and sector (i.e., public vs. private firms) of employment as well as job type (i.e., full-time vs. parttime) [18,19]. More specifically, some studies [18,20,21] suggest that sitting time may be higher among employees working in service firms, compared with employees of manufacturing organizations. Hence, work-related sitting time is compared between these two groups. ...
Background
Research to date has shown that work-related sitting time can be a major occupational health risk. This understanding has encouraged several workplace health promotion efforts. Even so, some domains of work-related sitting time and their associations with Perceived Workplace Support for Health (PWSH) have not been considered in research. This study aims to compare domains of work-related sitting time between employee characteristics (e.g., gender and age) and assess their associations with PWSH.
Methods
This study adopted a cross-sectional design with a sensitivity analysis against confounding and measures against common methods bias. The study population was employees of private and public firms in Accra, Ghana. In all, 1000 employees participated in the study. The hierarchical linear regression analysis and the independent samples t-test were used to present the results.
Results
Employees working in service firms, compared with those working in manufacturing firms, reported longer sitting time for lunchtime. After adjusting for physical function, we found a negative association between PWSH and the sum of continuous sitting time as well as its domains (p < 0.001), except for ‘sitting with a desk’ (p > 0.05).
Conclusion
Work-related sitting time was associated with employee characteristics and was lower at higher PWSH. This study reinforces the importance of workplace support for health and its role in work-related sitting.
... The importance of manager support for reducing sitting and more activity has been demonstrated by others (De Cocker et al., 2015;Gilson et al., 2011;Safi et al., 2022;Taylor et al., 2013). In line with our study, a recent qualitative study on workplace physical activity barriers and facilitators found that 75% of participants reported a lack of management support and 58% perceived workplace culture as a barrier to engaging in PA at work (Safi et al., 2022). ...
Purpose
This embedded qualitative study explored the acceptability, feasibility, and fidelity of two multi-level RCT interventions among office workers, aiming at improving movement behaviour to enhance mental health and cognition. The interventions addressed the organizational, environmental, and individual level.
Methods
Semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with 38 stakeholders after completion of the interventions. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
Results
The interventions were well appreciated, and office workers attributed improvements in movement behaviour and wellbeing to the interventions. Especially the cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) based counselling and free gym access were appreciated, feasible and delivered as planned. Participants described existing workplace norms as barriers to more activity, particularly for reducing sitting. Support from managers and team support were considered crucial components. However, delivering these components was difficult.
Conclusions
The findings support the design of the multi-level interventions for changing movement behaviour. Results highlight the potential of CBT for this target group and the importance of manager and team support. Desired effects of similar multi-level interventions, including CBT, might be achieved in future studies that carefully address the issues with feasibility and acceptability and the resulting low fidelity of some intervention components that were identified in this study.
... So, goals that trigger frequent posture transitions (e.g., 'improve one's health') are often incongruent with other high-priority goals (e.g., 'perform well at work'). Indeed, office workers often emphasize that they refrain from taking frequent standing breaks because these disrupt concentration or otherwise interfere with productivity (e.g., Gilson et al., 2011;O'Dolan et al., 2018). Therefore, we posit that trying to change people's goal priorities will often be an uphill battle. ...
To improve health and wellbeing, it is crucial that people regularly interrupt their sitting. In this paper, we propose a framework for examining and changing sitting behavior that addresses two key steps in the process towards developing effective interventions. First, we suggest that research should move away from its current focus on sitting time, which is an outcome of behavior. Rather, researchers should focus on stand-to-sit and sit-to-stand transitions, which are discrete units of behavior. Second, drawing on goal hierarchy models, we suggest that people rarely engage in stand-to-sit and sit-to-stand transitions for the purpose of being in a sitting or standing position; rather, we suggest that these transitions are means to higher-order goals (e.g., to complete work tasks, to watch television, to eat dinner). To improve adherence to and effectiveness of sitting behavior interventions, intervention designers should aim to increase the frequency of sit-to-stand (and stand-to-sit) transitions. To achieve this aim, intervention designers should capitalize on the higher-order goals that are typically served by these transitions. We suggest four concrete intervention strategies to increase sit-to-stand transitions in congruence with people's everyday goals. We also describe implications of our framework for theory and methods in sitting behavior research.
... Furthermore, we considered the effect of working type as well as the age range on fatigue development because sitting time significantly has a strong association with morbidity and mortality rates (Gilson et al., 2011). Thus, it was assumed that the longer the sitting time, the higher the fatigue. ...
Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), a clinical entity of chronic fatigue, has been associated with a decrease in regional gray matter volume (rGMV). In this study targeting a large number of healthy middle-aged individuals without CFS, the relationship between fatigue perception and rGMV was investigated. Considering that the work setting is an environmental factor that influences fatigue perception among healthy individuals, the differences between desk workers and non-desk workers were investigated. Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (CFQ) scores were used for perceptional evaluation of fatigue, and rGMV of 110 brain regions was adapted with Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) 8 on 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results for the volumetric calculation of gray matter. The CFQ scores were negatively correlated with the right supplementary motor area (SMC) and positively correlated with the right superior parietal lobule (SPL) and left basal forebrain in all participants ( n = 1,618). In desk workers and non-desk workers, the CFQ scores correlated with different regions and yielded different mechanisms of fatigue perception in the brain. Identifying the gray matter regions correlated with fatigue perception in healthy individuals may help understand the early stage of fatigue progression and establish future preventive measures.
... Another intervention strategy which comprised of restructuring the physical environment was to increase the height of tables and to turn off elevators. Whilst previous studies have identified that environmental changes, such as making stair well access easier and moving printers away from desks, are considered as effective strategies by employees (Gilson et al., 2011), the inclusion within the co-created interventions was somewhat counterintuitive. In relation to implementation strategies, it was identified that the co-creators did not want the interventions to be enforced or dictated to employees. ...
Globally, physical activity levels have declined sharply and it has been estimated that up to 42% of individuals within developed countries are classified as being physically inactive. Insufficient physical activity is a substantial health risk and has been associated with negative psychophysiological outcomes including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and depression. Whilst there are many contributors to physical inactivity the workplace has been identified as a particularly significant contributor. Consistently high levels of sedentary behaviour have been documented within many modern workplaces, with employees spending up to 81% of working hours seated in white collar roles. Given that approximately 58% of global workforce will spend one third of their adult life at
work, the workplace has been identified as a key domain in which researchers can deliver
interventions to promote physical activity. Despite this, evidence for the efficacy of workplace physical activity interventions has been mixed. One potential explanation for this is an underutilisation of participatory approaches during intervention design. Within organisational research, concerns have been expressed regarding a widening gap between research and practice.Whilst interventions may be academically robust they may lack sufficient relevancy to the employees that they are intended to support. To address these issues this thesis adopted a pragmatic, participatory stance and drew upon co-creation methodologies to develop a new workplace physical activity intervention that would meet the needs of employees.
... Prolonged sitting had been thought as an unhealthy way of working by many researches, which could lead to a range of health problems, including MSDs. [34][35][36] With the development of mechanisation and intelligence, sedentary work in the manufacturing industry is increasing as well. The following musculoskeletal diseases should be of concern. ...
Objective
To survey the prevalence of lower extremity musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among Chinese manufacturing workers, and to identify the associated factors.
Design
Observational study with cross-sectional design.
Setting
A self-administered questionnaire survey was conducted in four manufacturing factories in China.
Participants
7908 manufacturing workers were included in this study after excluding non-conforming personnel.
Outcome measures
Individual and work-related information, and MSDs in the whole leg and knee region were measured by the anonymous self-administered questionnaire. Individual and work-related factors associated with MSDs and their effects were identified through multivariate logistic regression.
Results
Of all respondents, 3241 (41.0%) reported having had lower extremity MSDs in the recent 12 months, and for the knees, ankles/feet and hips/thighs were 29.5%, 23.9% and 16.7%, respectively. After confounder-adjusted single-factor analysis, 22 variables (of 24) were significantly related to the disorders. Factors like always kneeling/squatting for long periods, always standing for long periods and often lifting in an uncomfortable position were shown to have higher risks, with ORs of 2.77 (95% CI: 2.33 to 3.30), 2.30 (1.96 to 2.69) and 2.25 (2.04 to 2.47). Comparable results were found on knee disorders. The final model included 15 variables of demography, biomechanics and work organisation. The following factors showed increased risks of lower extremity MSDs: being female, being older, longer working years, higher body mass index (BMI), keeping the same posture for a long time, awkward position, shift work and monotonous work. Whereas having enough breaks reduced the risk.
Conclusion
The prevalence of lower extremity MSDs among Chinese manufacturing workers is high. The most commonly affected body regions were the knees and ankles/feet. Multiple factors were found associated with lower extremity MSDs including age, BMI, work experience, work organisations, physical ergonomics exposures, etc.
... Promoting sitting less (and other health initiatives) at work needs to be a joint endeavour, with responsibility at all levels of management and across the organisation [44,49]. The idea that sitting is a social practice, i.e., being what "work" is for employees with sedentary jobs, seems on the one hand inevitable (sedentary jobs equate to sitting at work) [50,51], but on the other hand a relevant insight when considering what might be needed to make the workplace less sedentary. Changes that involve redefining "work" could support employees to sit less. ...
Long periods of workplace sitting are associated with poor health outcomes. Interventions to reduce workplace sitting time have had variable impacts, the reasons for which require further investigation. In this paper, we report on a process evaluation aiming to determine the intervention fidelity of three “sit less at work” interventions and to explore barriers and enablers to implementation, using a mixed methods “before and after” intervention study design. Convenience samples of staff were recruited from three diverse organisations to participate in pre- and post-intervention online questionnaires, objective measures of sitting time (using activPAL3™ devices) and post-intervention focus groups. Intervention implementers and key personnel were also recruited to participate in post-intervention focus groups and interviews. The process evaluation found that none of the interventions were implemented as intended, with no consistent reductions in sitting time. Contextual and organisational cultural barriers included workload pressures and the social norms of sitting, competing priorities, lack of management buy-in, and perceptions of where the responsibility for behaviour change should come from. To ensure effective implementation of future initiatives, deeper organisational-level change, requiring buy-in from all levels of management and staff, may be needed to shift organisational culture and associated social norms.
... Employers have expressed concern that workers spending less time sitting and more time active at work may take time away from work tasks thereby reducing work ability. 22 However, the positive aspects of breaking up sitting time and being more physically active on cognitive function by increasing cerebral blood flow and regulating hormonal fluctuations counter that argument. 23 Furthermore, sleep parameters (ie, duration and quality) have been associated with work ability. ...
Physical behavior (i.e., physical activity, sedentary behavior, and sleep) is a crucial lifestyle factor for preventing and managing diseases across the lifespan. However, less is known about potential work-related psychological and cognitive outcomes such as productivity. The present study examined within-person associations between physical behavior and self-perceived work ability.
To investigate the degree to which physical behavior parameters influence self-perceived work ability in everyday life, we conducted an Ambulatory Assessment study in 103 university students over 5 days. Physical behavior was assessed continuously via a multi-sensor system. Self-perceived work ability was assessed repeatedly up to six times per day on smartphones. We employed multilevel modeling to analyze the within-person effects of physical behavior on self-perceived work ability.
Physical activity intensity (MET) (β = 0.15 ± 0.06, t= 2.59, P = 0.012) and sit-to-stand transitions (β = 0.07 ± 0.03, t= 2.44, P = 0.015) were positively associated with self-perceived work ability. Sedentary bouts (≥ 20 min) (β =- 0.21 ± 0.08, t= -2.74, P = 0.006) and deviation from a recommended sleep duration (i.e., 8 hours) (β =- 0.1 ± 0.04, t= -2.38, P = 0.018) were negatively associated with self-perceived work ability. Exploratory analyses supported the robustness of our findings by comparing various time frames. Total sedentary time and sleep quality were not associated with self-perceived work ability.
Regular sleep durations, breaking up sedentary time through sit-to-stand transitions and higher intensities of physical activity may be important for the regulation of self-perceived work ability in university students' daily lives.
... Social and cultural norms, leadership, work tasks, workload and musculoskeletal disorders have been described to impact physical behaviors at work [10][11][12][13]. Environmental factors like building and interior design have also been described as important for physical behaviors [13,14]. Thus, interventions to decrease sitting and increase standing and walking in offices are suggested to target environmental, organizational, group and individual levels [9,15,16]. ...
Studies using technical measurements of physical behavior show wide interindividual variations. This study aimed to explore underlying factors related to sitting, standing and walking among office workers. Cross-sectional data for background characteristics, work-related variables, and device-based measures for sitting, standing and walking were collected among office workers in either a cell office or a flex office with activity-based work. Data were analyzed by Factor Analysis of Mixed Data (FAMD) and multiple robust linear regression. The FAMD resulted in the combination of underlying factors describing six character types. The (1) harmonic and healthy, (2) disabled with poor health, (3) manager that spend a lot of time in meetings and has very high workload, (4) engaged with high workload, (5) employee with creative and computer intense work, with high workload and, (6) employee with high BMI with creative and collaborative work. Regression analysis showed that the character type that was “engaged with high workload” sat more and stood less, while the character type with ”high BMI and with creative and collaborative work” sat less. The results suggest that physical behavior among office workers is influenced by a complex combination of factors, which should be taken into account in the evaluation of future studies of larger cohorts.
... A number of studies and reviews demonstrate the link between sedentary behaviour and poor health (Gilson et al. 2018;Marshall and Gyi 2010;Owen et al. 2000;Dunstan et al. 2012;Picavet et al. 2016;World Health Organization 2007). Some studies even date back to the 17 th century; back then, Ramazzini, an occupational physician, established a clear relationship between sedentary behaviour and health consequences (Franco and Fusetti 2004). ...
Recent research studies in translation devote increasing attention to the pivotal role that ergonomics plays in translators’ workplaces. However, there are no previous research studies that focus on how effective translators’ lifestyles are and provide results on how necessary it is to improve them. The aim of this paper is to show results from a pilot qualitative research study conducted in Spain with a focus group composed of a representative from four different professional profiles from the translation industry: a part-time employee at a translation company, a full-time employee at a translation company, a freelance translator, and an intern at a translation company. The focus group followed a non-structured interview and the list of topics ranged from changes in sleeping and eating patterns and regularity of physical activity depending on the volume of work translators had, to health problems related to these variations in their daily routines. Participants’ qualitative answers have shed light on the topic and have allowed us to develop a questionnaire that will be distributed internationally to compare data from different countries in a future study of a wider scope.
... Executives who practiced good habits encouraged personnel in the department to do the same. This is consistent with studies from the Australian government, which show that leaders are regarded as important to reducing SB in the workplace [27]. While colleagues have a direct effect on personal behavior, if a colleague doesn't like to walk or move, it is more likely for coworkers nearby to be influenced by those behaviors. ...
Purpose
This study aimed to explore knowledge, attitude, behavior and causes of sedentary behavior (SB) among office workers and guidelines for active office intervention.
Design/methodology/approach
The study was comprised of a survey and an interview. In total, 39 nonacademic office workers responded to the Past-day Adults Sedentary Time-University (PAST-U) and workplace sitting break (SITBRQ) questionnaire to measure SB level, sitting bout, frequency and duration of sitting interrupted in 1 h and in whole working hours. Eleven executives and staffs participated in in-depth interviews to understand knowledge, attitude, behavior and cause of SB and guidelines for active office intervention.
Findings
Participants commonly spend most of their working time in SB (383.85 ± 93.03 min or 6 h 23 min). The interview indicated that at an individual level, participants lack knowledge and understanding of SB. The most common causes of SB are huge workload, personal characteristics and the weather. At the organizational level, there is no policy, no support from colleagues or organizations, while the physical environment is not conducive to reducing SB.
Originality/value
The outcomes of the study are used as basic information and guidelines for establishing an active office intervention in accordance with the culture and context of Thai society. There have been studies in Thailand that examine SB but no studies that have been conducted to study basic information on knowledge, attitudes, behaviors and causes of SB to be used in planning active office intervention to reduce SB.
... The need to focus during certain work tasks was a reason for users and non-users to work in a seated position. Although quantitative research has shown that work productivity might not be affected when sit-stand workstations are used [21,43,44], earlier qualitative research also noted perceived concerns about productivity while working in a standing position [29,35,45,46]. In the current study, statements about productivity (gains or losses) were not mentioned. ...
Objective
Sit-stand workstations have been shown to be effective in reducing sitting time in office workers. The aim of this study was to explore reasons for use and non-use of sit-stand workstations and strategies to decrease sitting and increase physical activity in the workplace from perspectives of users and non-users, as well as from managers and ergo-coaches.
Methods
Six group interviews with employees who have had access to sit-stand workstations for several years were conducted in a large semi-governmental organisation in the Netherlands. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Open coding was conducted by three researchers and codes and themes were discussed within the research team.
Results
Thematic analysis resulted in two major themes: 1) Reasons for use and non-use and 2) Strategies to increase standing and physical activity in the workplace. Shared and distinct reasons for use and non-use were identified between users and non-users of the sit-stand workstations. The most important reasons for use indicated by users were that they had experiencing immediate benefits, including staying alert and increasing focus; these benefits were not acknowledged by non-users. Non-users indicated that sitting was comfortable for them and that they were therefore not motivated to use the standing option. Strategies to increase the use of the standing option included an introductory phase to become familiar with working while standing and to experience the immediate benefits that come from using the standing option. Furthermore, providing reminders to use the standing option was suggested as a strategy to increase and sustain the use of sit-stand workstations. Increased use may lead to a change in the sitting culture within the organisation, as more employees would adopt active movement behaviours.
Conclusion
Immediate benefits of the use of the standing option–only mentioned by the users–was the most distinct reason to use sit-stand workstations. Future research should explore how to motivate potential users to adhere to an introductory phase in order to experience these immediate benefits, whether it is linked to the use of sit-stand workstations or other interventions to reduce sitting time.
... Prolonged sitting has been proved a potential hazard for workers' health including low−back pain [5,8,17,18], decline in cognitive function [5,19,20], diabetes [21], cardiovascular disease [14,20], and all-cause mortality [22]. Increased prolonged sitting time has also been shown to negatively correlate with work engagement [20,23,24] and performance [25]. Even though prolonged sitting work is characterized by low-level muscle loading [26], musculoskeletal disorders are the most common problems among the office workers or people who sit for prolonged periods [27]. ...
BACKGROUND
Prolonged sitting at work can lead to adverse health outcomes. The health risk of office workers is an increasing concern for society and industry with prolonged sitting work becomes more prevalent.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to explore the variation in muscle activities during prolonged sitting work and found out when and how to take a break to mitigate the risk of muscle symptoms.
METHODS
A preliminary survey was conducted to find out the prevalence of muscle discomfort in sedentary work. Firstly, a 2-hrs sedentary computer work was designed based on the preliminary study to investigate the variation in muscle activities. 24 participants took part in the EMG (electromyography) measurement study. The EMG variations in the trapezius muscle and latissimus dorsi were investigated. Then the intervention time was determined based on the EMG measurement study. Secondly, 48 participants were divided into six groups to compare the effectiveness of every break type (passive break, active break of changing their posture, and stand and stretch their body with 5 or 10 mins). Finally, data consisting of EMG amplitudes and spectra and subjective assessment of discomfort were analyzed.
RESULTS
In the EMG experiment, results from the JASA (joint analysis of the spectra and amplitudes) method showed muscle fatigue after about 40 mins of sedentary work. In the intervention experiment, the results showed that standing and stretching for 5 mins was the most effective break type, and this type of break could keep the muscles’ state at a recovery level for about 30−45 mins.
CONCLUSIONS
This study offers the possibility of being applied to office workers and provides preliminary data support and theoretical exploration for a follow-up early muscle fatigue detection system.
... This has been highlighted elsewhere, highlighting the need for tailored and pragmatic approaches to encouraging a change in sitting and activity in the workplace. 34 Technologysupported strategies offer a platform to overcome this hurdle as it provides an opportunity to personalize intervention content. 13 Although having personal choice over intervention strategies was preferred, results from the present study suggest that it may not be enough for an individual to change their sitting behavior alone. ...
Objective:
Employee and employer views regarding how technology-supported strategies can best meet their needs to reduce occupational sitting are not well known. This study explored target user and key stakeholder beliefs regarding strategies to reduce occupational sitting focusing on technology-supported approaches.
Methods:
Nine focus groups and two interviews (employees, n = 27; employers, n = 19; board members, n = 2) were conducted, transcribed and analysed thematically.
Results:
The main barrier to reducing sitting was job-related tasks taking primary priority. Intervention designers should consider individual preferences, environmental factors, judgemental culture, productivity concerns and staff knowledge. Technology-supported strategies such as smartphone applications, computer software, wearables and emails were deemed to be useful tools to provide prompts and allow behavioural self-monitoring in an easily individualised manner.
Conclusions:
Technology-supported strategies were seen to be valuable approaches and might fruitfully be incorporated into future interventions to reduce sitting time.
... Five of the six studies reported sit-stand desk provision as the environmental change strategy [9]. However, the extent of sit-stand desk use varies in different organisational and workplace contexts [10,11]. The socioecological model comprehensively integrates the individual and the social to represent a framework that recognises a multitude of interconnected factors on different 'levels' (e.g. ...
Background:
Sit-stand desk interventions have the potential to reduce workplace sedentary behaviour and improve employee health. However, the extent of sit-stand desk use varies between employees and in different organisational contexts. Framed by organisational cultural theory and product design theory, this study examined employees' lived experience of taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention, to understand the processes influencing feasibility and acceptability.
Methods:
Participant observations and qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 employees from two office-based workplaces in the UK, as part of a process evaluation that ran alongside a pilot RCT of a workplace sit-stand desk intervention. Observational field notes and transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.
Results:
Three themes related to the experience of using a sit-stand desk at work were generated: employees' relationship with their sit-stand desk; aspirations and outcomes related to employee health and productivity; and cultural norms and interpersonal relationships. The perceived usability of the desk varied depending on how employees interacted with the desk within their personal and organisational context. Employees reported that the perceived influence of the desk on their productivity levels shaped use of the desk; those who perceived that standing increased energy and alertness tended to stand more often. Sit-stand desks were voiced as being more acceptable than intervention strategies that involve leaving the desk, as productivity was conflated with being at the desk.
Conclusions:
The findings indicate a range of organisational, social-cultural and individual-level factors that shape the feasibility and acceptability of sit-stand desk use, and suggest strategies for improving employees' experiences of using a sit-stand desk at work, which might positively influence sedentary behaviour reduction and health.
Trial registration:
Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02172599, 22nd June 2014 (prospectively registered).
... The rationale for selecting the intervention level(s) was to guide the choice of components and to consider the interplay between these. For example, Mackenzie et al. [25] cited Gilson et al.'s [48] suggestion that interventions should address multiple levels of influence, and set out to develop a multi-level intervention to reduce workplace sitting in a university department. They carried out a focus group with 13 members of their target population to identify appropriate intervention content to address individual, social, environmental, and organisational levels of influence. ...
Background:
Researchers publish the processes they use to develop interventions to improve health. Reflecting on this endeavour may help future developers to improve their practice.
Methods:
Our aim was to collate, describe, and analyse the actions developers take when developing complex interventions to improve health. We carried out a systematic mapping review of empirical research studies that report the development of complex interventions to improve health. A search was undertaken of five databases over 2015-2016 using the term 'intervention dev*'. Eighty-seven journal articles reporting the process of intervention development were identified. A purposive subset of 30 articles, using a range of published approaches to developing interventions, was selected for in-depth analysis using principles of realist synthesis to identify the actions of intervention development and rationales underpinning those actions.
Results:
The 87 articles were from the USA (39/87), the UK (32/87), continental Europe (6/87), and the rest of the world (10/87). These mainly took a pragmatic self-selected approach (n = 43); a theory- and evidence-based approach, e.g. Intervention Mapping, Behaviour Change Wheel (n = 22); or a partnership approach, e.g. community-based participatory research, co-design (n = 10). Ten actions of intervention development were identified from the subset of 30 articles, including identifying a need for an intervention, selecting the intervention development approach to follow, considering the needs of the target population, reviewing published evidence, involving stakeholders, drawing or generating theory, and designing and refining the intervention. Rationales for these actions were that they would produce more engaging, acceptable, feasible, and effective interventions.
Conclusions:
Developers take a variety of approaches to the international endeavour of complex intervention development. We have identified and described a set of actions taken within this endeavour regardless of whether developers follow a published approach or not. Future developers can use these actions and the rationales that underpin them to help them make decisions about the process of intervention development.
Trial registration:
PROSPERO, CRD42017080545.
... A systematic review revealed the effectiveness of SB interventions (e.g., introduction of adjustable work stations) in reducing mean sitting time by 91 min/day at work compared with control groups within a short period of 3 to 12 weeks (Prince, Saunders, Gresty, & Reid, 2014). Albeit the health benefits of reducing occupational SB, cost implications were perceived to affect the feasibility of installing such facilities and these cost concerns were previously reported in other studies (De Cocker et al., 2015;Gilson, Burton, van Uffelen, & Brown, 2011). Cost-effectiveness analysis and evidence outlining the long-term use of adjustable workstations in reducing occupational SB has not been established (Dunstan et al., 2013). ...
We aim to assess sedentary behavior (SB) and its determinants, as well as potential strategies to reduce SB among employees in a tertiary hospital in Singapore, using a mixed-methods approach grounded in the socioecological framework. All employees with email and security guards of a tertiary hospital in Singapore were invited to complete a questionnaire that captured sociodemographics and self-reported domain-specific SB. Environmental influences of occupational SB were assessed using an adapted version of the Checklist for Health Promotion Environments at the Worksite (CHEW). Focus group discussion (FGD) addressed perceptions, barriers, and strategies toward reducing workplace SB. Analyses were performed separately and integrated using an inductive comparative approach. The median occupational sitting time ( n = 938) was 300 minutes/day, and highest among administrative staff (administrative, 421 minutes/day; allied health, 300 minutes/day; ancillary, 300 minutes/day; nursing, 120 minutes/day; medical/dental/others, 240 minutes/day; p value: <.001). The CHEW assessment identified poor physical and information environment contributing to occupational SB. FGDs confirmed an unsupportive environment and elicited barriers such as low SB awareness, nature of work, and workplace norms. Besides environmental approaches, participants suggested having face-to-face communication and social modelling to promote more breaks from sitting. This mixed-methods study among diverse professional groups of a tertiary hospital indicated a large amount of occupational SB, particularly among administrative staff. Raising awareness of the health risks of SB and building a supportive organizational culture, information, and physical environment emerged as significant factors. To reduce occupational SB, multicomponent interventions addressing these diverse factors are warranted.
... We found increased sedentary time to be associated with more worry of developing T2DM and less personal control, a finding that is consistent with a study of Australian office workers aged 35-56 years [38]. Somewhat perplexing, we also found that less physical activities were associated with more personal control and being more optimistic about not developing T2DM. ...
Background
The perceived risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can motivate individuals to adopt preventive health behaviors. Compared with fathers, mothers of young children often experience unique risk factors for developing T2DM: pregnancy-related weight gain, lifestyle changes related to child care, and the increased incidence of gestational diabetes mellitus. Understanding how actual risk factors affect the perceived risk of developing T2DM can foster effective diabetes prevention interventions for this population. The aims of this study were to describe the risk, perceived and actual, of developing T2DM and to explore the influencing factors of perceived risk for Chinese mothers of preschool children in China.
Methods
A multisite, cross-sectional survey was conducted and included 176 mothers (mean age of 31.19 years old) of preschool children (aged 3–7 years old) from four preschools in Changsha, the capital city of Hunan Province, China. The overall perceived risk of developing T2DM was measured by one item “Your own personal health risk is at almost no risk, slight risk, moderate risk or high risk from diabetes” from the Risk Perception Survey for Developing Diabetes (RPS-DD). PRS-DD and the Chinese version of the Canadian Diabetes Risk Assessment Questionnaire (CHINARISK) were used to assess perceived risk related worry, personal control, optimistic bias, and diabetes risk knowledge and actual risk of T2DM. Mothers also reported their height, weight, and waist circumference followed by the NIH protocol. Pearson correlation and stepwise multivariate linear regression were used to explore how the actual risk factors affected the perceived risk of developing diabetes (RPS-DD)).
Results
Nearly 90% of mothers perceived almost no/slight risk for developing diabetes. Nearly half of the mothers had parents or siblings with diabetes. Roughly 70% of the mothers did not eat five servings of fruits and vegetables per day, and more than 50% did not exercise at least 30 minutes a day. In the five stepwise multivariate linear regression models, young mothers (95% CI .400–1.311) and those with a family history of diabetes (95% CI -0.74- .000) were founded a higher overall perceived risk. Mothers who reported more sedentary time (95% CI -0.029- -0.008) and less physical activity had less personal control (95% CI -0.354- -0.046). Mothers with more sedentary time had more worries about developing T2DM(95% CI 0.008–0.035) . Mothers who were older (95% CI -0.440–0.055) or had more physical activities (95% CI 0.003–0.048) had more optimistic bias of not developing T2DM. Mothers who had a higher education level (95% CI .354–1.422) and a family history of diabetes (95% CI .029–2.231) had more diabetes risk knowledge of developing T2DM.
Conclusion
This study found that Chinese mothers of preschool children in urban areas reported low perceived risk of developing T2DM, although they have actual risk factors. These women did not associate anthropometric, health history, or health behavior factors with the risk of developing T2DM. Anthropometrics and risk factors associated with behavioral risk factors may be the focus of diabetes prevention programs.
... Identifying, and addressing barriers and enablers as part of the intervention development process is also consistent with guidance from the Medical Research Council [16] and supports the development of more effective interventions [15]. To date, only a small number of studies have reported barriers and enablers to workplace sitting interventions as a first step to intervention development [17][18][19]. More frequently, qualitative studies have explored barriers and enablers to sitting less at work as a standalone study, without explicitly stating that these findings will then be used to inform the development of interventions [20][21][22]. ...
Background:
Prolonged sitting is associated with a range of chronic health conditions and working in office-based jobs is an important contributor to total daily sitting time. Consequently, interventions to reduce workplace sitting have been developed and tested; however, no single intervention strategy consistently produces reductions in workplace sitting time. Exploring barriers and enablers to sitting less at work has been shown to support the development of more effective interventions. In order to address these barriers and enablers during the development and implementation of sit less at work interventions, it is important to understand how they may differ in different types of organisation, an area which has not yet been explored. The main aim of this study was to determine whether barriers and enablers to sitting less at work varied between organisations of different size and sector.
Methods:
A qualitative study design was used. Four organisations of different sizes and sectors participated: a small business, a charity, a local authority and a large corporation. A total of ten focus groups comprising 40 volunteer employees were conducted. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were then thematically analysed using pre-defined themes, but analysis also allowed for emergence of additional themes.
Results:
Barriers and enablers which were consistently raised by participants across all four organisations primarily included: individual-level factors such as habits and routines, and personal motivations and preferences; and factors relating to the internal physical environment. Barriers and enablers that differed by organisation mainly related to: organisational-level factors such as organisational culture, organisation size, and ways of working; and factors relating to the broader social, economic and political context such as the idea of presenteeism, and the impact of wider economic and political issues.
Conclusions:
This study found that although some themes were consistently raised by participants from organisations of different size and sector, participants from these organisations also experienced some different barriers and enablers to sitting less at work. For future research or practice, the study findings highlight that organisation-specific barriers and enablers need to be identified and addressed during the development and implementation of sit less at work interventions.
... We found an overarching view from participants that promoting physical activity (and any health-related initiatives) through the workplace is a joint endeavour, with responsibility at all levels of management and with employees themselves. Similar views have been expressed before by office workers [19,20], and this study demonstrates the salience of this view across industry sectors, many of which do not involve offices or desk-based roles (e.g., nursing, cleaning, retail, manufacturing, construction). ...
Introduction: With two thirds of adults in paid employment and one third physically inactive, workplaces are an important setting for promoting more physical activity. We explored the attitudes and practices of employees and managers from different industries towards sitting and moving at work, to inform the development of acceptable solutions for encouraging businesses to adopt activity-promoting workplaces. Method: We conducted focus groups with employees and structured interviews with upper/middle managers from 12 organisations in a range of industries (e.g., education, healthcare, manufacturing, construction, insurance, mining). Topics focused on past and current workplace health and wellness initiatives, workplace culture and environment related to physical activity, responsibility for employee physical activity patterns at work, and enablers of/barriers to activity promoting workplaces. Results: Physical activity was not an explicit priority in existing occupational health and wellness initiatives. Instead, there was a strong focus on education about preventing and managing injuries, such as manual handling among non-office workers and desk-based ergonomics for office workers. Physical activity was viewed as a strategy for maintaining work ability and preventing injury, particularly in blue-collar staff, rather than for chronic disease prevention. Managers noted structural/organisational barriers/enablers to promoting physical activity at work (e.g., regulations, costs, competing concerns), while employees tended to focus on individual constraints such as time and geographic location. The issues of "initiative overload" and making physical activity a part of “business as usual” emerged as strong themes from employees and managers. Conclusions: While there is stakeholder enthusiasm for creating activity-promoting workplaces, multi-level support is needed to make physical activity an integral part of day-to-day business. The synergism between occupational health and safety priorities could be leveraged to facilitate the creation of activity-promoting workplaces.
... Sedentary occupations have been recognised as a health risk as long ago as 1958, when Morris et al. [13] showed a link between heart disease and reduced physical activity at work. More recent research has reported that sedentary behaviour may be linked to an increased risk of detrimental health effects such as diabetes, cardiovascular disease and possibly cancer [8,[14][15][16][17][18][19]. Sedentary behaviour is defined as any waking behaviours that are done sitting or reclining and cost ≤1.5 times the basal metabolic rate [20]. ...
Background:
Electric adjustable height desks (EAHD) have been promoted as an opportunity for desk based workers to stand at work but there is limited evidence that they have an effect on light physical activity.
Objective:
The main objective was to determine if there would be a change in light physical activity with the introduction of EAHD. The secondary objective was to assess if there was an associated change in leisure time activity.
Methods:
Activity levels were measured by step counts, self-reported activity levels and pre- and post-trial recall levels. Statistical analysis of the data was performed with the software R. Generalised linear models were fitted to the data. A Poisson regression was used for count data. Statistical hypotheses were deemed significant if their p values were less than 0.05.
Results:
There was a significant (p < 0.001) effect on step counts associated with allocation of EAHD and a significant (p < 0.001) increase in self-reported activity for the Intervention (EAHD) group. Having an EAHD was associated with increased activity during leisure (p = 0.039).
Conclusions:
Activity levels, especially light physical activity, were significantly increased with the allocation of an electric adjustable height desk. This pilot study showed that the environmental change of introduction of electric adjustable height desks into an office workplace can increase physical activity and reduce sitting durations. There is limited evidence that the increase in work activity has a positive impact on leisure time activity.
... Results from a focus group conducted in a similar demographic to the sample included in the present study indicated that middle-aged, female, full-time employees were aware that prolonged sitting was bad for health and that occupational sitting was the biggest contributor to daily sedentary behaviour. [28] For this reason, baseline IPAQ scores helped to capture participant's physical activity and sedentary behaviour status prior to participation in the study. Second, without a control group, the true effect of the intervention on sedentary behaviour cannot be isolated from outside factors. ...
... In terms of qualitative findings, both employees and managers focused on musculoskeletal and performance issues relating to SB rather than chronic ill-health [9]. The perceived benefits of reducing sitting in creating a more positive psychosocial environment were consistent with past research among employees and middle managers [10]. Comments about workplace breaks causing disruption and worker resistance highlight the need for workplace interventions to be inclusive and consultative. ...
Background:
Sedentary behaviour (SB) in the form of uninterrupted sitting constitutes a risk factor for chronic disease that is independent of the risks associated with insufficient physical activity (PA). However, little is known about employee and manager health beliefs concerning SB and PA.
Aims:
We assess health beliefs of desk-based workers concerning PA and SB accrued at work versus during leisure. We ask whether recreational PA attenuates the perceived ill-health effects of prolonged occupational SB, and compare attitudes of employees and managers to interventions aimed at reducing/interrupting workplace sitting.
Methods:
Two hundred and twenty-two desk-based employees and 121 managers located in Melbourne, Australia, rated the healthiness of vignettes describing combinations of uninterrupted sitting, sitting with breaks, light PA and moderate-to-vigorous PA accumulated at work and during leisure time. Participants also responded to open-ended questions concerning the implications of reducing workplace sitting.
Results:
Mixed-model ANOVA revealed that the presence of leisure-time PA greatly diminished the perceived detrimental effects to health of workplace sitting. Subsequent thematic analysis of qualitative data further revealed that participants' concerns with SB were primarily musculoskeletal and workplace performance rather than chronic health.
Conclusions:
Employees and their managers do not rate uninterrupted sitting as being unhealthy when it is presented to them in the form of an 'active couch potato' lifestyle (a person who meets minimum PA recommendations but spends much of their work time and non-PA time sitting). We recommend that interventions targeting workplace SB take into account the contextual nature of health beliefs.
... A third pattern suggests that physical activities are biased towards leisure and occupational domains and the active occupational group is more prone to sedentary lifestyles when not engaged in work. The implication of mhealth for the institutionalisation of physical activity in four domains can be mapped to incorporating economic, social and cognitive behavioural feedback interventions that are specifically tailored to the need of individuals [23][24][25][26][27][28]. While such interventions provide encouragement and positive reinforcement for the activity, the probability of cheating behaviour, particularly in youth, should be taken into consideration in the design of the platform [29,30]. ...
An attempt has been made to review the potential of mhealth in terms of remote monitoring of physical activities. This allows individuals to resume their normal daily activities while their health parameters are remotely monitored to predict/detect a decline in their health index that demands in-patient care. The ability of sensor technologies and algorithms to deliver health outcomes is discussed to allay doubts about the potential usefulness of the proposed solutions. Additionally, this chapter discussed the major challenges and the response of leading-edge technologies to these challenges in order to optimise the technology fitness for the application of interest. A summary of pilots and trials that have been carried out in many countries and regions is provided to create well-established fact bases of mhealth solutions for remote monitoring of physical activities.
With the evidence that time spent sitting can have adverse health consequences, a research priority is to build the requisite knowledge base for effective interventions—that is, what needs to be changed in order to change sitting time? To do so requires an understanding of the environmental and contextual determinants of sedentary behaviours, particularly to guide broad-reach public health approaches. Conceptual models that focus explicitly on environmental and contextual factors can assist in developing this key element of the overall sedentary behaviour epidemiology research agenda. Sedentary behaviours can usefully be understood as inherently context-specific—taking place in domestic environments, during transportation, and in educational and workplace environments. Within this perspective, an ecological model that emphasises the role of ‘behaviour settings’—context-specific environmental influences—has relevance. This chapter presents an approach informed by a behavioural epidemiology framework, drawing on evidence about sedentary behaviour and health, and about the contexts of time spent sitting. The aim is to provide an understanding of the environment- and policy-relevant determinants of sedentary behaviour (considered distinctly, but not separate from personal and social factors). To demonstrate how this approach can be helpful, we apply the five principles of an ecological model to sitting in the workplace. We outline how this model can provide an environmentally focused perspective and help to direct attention to multiple levels of influence on sedentary behaviour, and present an example of a workplace sitting-reduction intervention. We discuss some of the strengths and limitations of an ecological/environmental approach and suggest opportunities for future research.
This article is about the metabolic health risks involved with prolonged sitting also known as sedentary lifestyle. Our bodies are designed to move, and research has shown that sedentary lifestyles increase health risks. In addition to type 2 diabetes, cancers, and cardiovascular diseases, sedentary lifestyles can lead to premature mortality. Often times a sedentary activity such as prolonged sitting is overlooked, when in fact, sitting for long periods of time has a negative effect on health. The goal of this presentation is to research and spread awareness about the health risks involved with prolonged sitting. In order to spread awareness, we have explored most of the common health risk associated with prolong sitting and as well made some crucial recommendations that are needed to elicit the right attitude to prolong sitting among individuals. This topic address sedentary lifestyles as a problem and display what a sedentary lifestyle looks like. It went further to discuss the problem of prolonged sitting and potential solutions. Although there are resources that already exist on the topic of sedentary lifestyles. We have created resources specific to the individuals in order to be more effective in spreading awareness to them. This is a widespread problem with serious consequences, yet simple fixes. This is an attempt to spread awareness to a population that includes individuals at a critical point in life who may not be informed about this issue.
Background:
The aim of this study was to examine whether a low-cost standing desk intervention that reduced occupational sitting was associated with changes in work-time cognitive-affective states in real time using ecological momentary assessments at the start and end of the trial.
Methods:
Forty-one office employees (91.7% female, mean age = 39.8 [10.1] y) were randomized to receive a low-cost standing desk or a waitlist control. Participants received 5 surveys each day for 5 workdays via smartphone application prior to randomization and at trial's end. Ecological momentary assessment assessed current work-time psychological states (valence and arousal, stress, fatigue, and perceived productivity). Multilevel models assessed whether changes in work-time outcomes over the course of the intervention were significantly different between treatment groups.
Results:
There were no significant differences in outcomes between the groups except for fatigue, with the control group reporting a significant decrease in daily fatigue following the intervention (P < .001). The intervention group reported no significant changes in any of the work-time outcomes across the study period (P > .05).
Conclusions:
A low-cost standing desk intervention to reduce occupational sedentary behavior did not negatively impact work-time outcomes such as productivity and fatigue in the short term.
During their activities of daily living, humans run, walk, stand, sit, and lie down. Recent changes in our environment have favored sedentary behavior over more physically active behavior to such a degree that our health is in danger. Here, we sought to address the problem of excessive time spent seated from various theoretical viewpoints, including postural control, human factors engineering, human history and health psychology. If nothing is done now, the high prevalence of sitting will continue to increase. We make a case for the standing position by demonstrating that spending more time upright can mitigate the physiological and psychological problems associated with excessive sitting without lowering task performance and productivity. The psychological literature even highlights potential benefits of performing certain tasks in the standing position. We propose a number of recommendations on spending more time (but not too much) in the standing position and on more active, nonambulatory behaviors. There is a need to inform people about (i) harmful consequences of excessive sitting and (ii) benefits of spending more time performing active, nonambulatory behaviors. One clear benefit is to reduce detrimental health consequences of excessive sitting and to provide potential additional benefits in terms of productivity and performance.
The workplace is considered an effective setting for health and wellbeing interventions, including programmes focusing on nutrition, and provides opportunities to tailor programmes to meet the specific needs of industry and employees. This study explored nutrition practices amongst construction workers and managers to inform the design of a nutrition intervention. Five focus groups were conducted on three construction sites: two with managers (n = 11) and three with workers (n = 27). Construction workers and managers identified several unhealthy nutrition-related behaviours, including high consumption of convenient and fast foods, excessive coffee, alcohol, energy drinks and low fruit and vegetable intake. These behaviours were often attributed to high workloads, long working hours and physically demanding jobs. Snacking and skipping meals were repeatedly reported, attributed to short breaks and poor accessibility to food outlets. The nutritional quality of meals differed between individuals (homemade vs fast food), depending on the type of sites (temporary vs permanent) and site location. Nutrition knowledge, establishing routines, meal planning and preparation were recognized as important in sustaining healthy nutrition habits. However, meal preparation depended on the facilities available, which differed between managers and workers, highlighting the complex relationship between the workplace context and eating behaviours. Construction workers were interested in learning about nutrition and improving their eating habits through nutrition intervention. However, they highlighted that better cooking and storage facilities on site, together with fewer job demands and longer break times, would enhance the sustainability of the intervention and their ability to make healthier food choices.
Background:
Breaking up sedentary behavior with standing or walking can decrease discomfort, fatigue, and sleepiness. However, less is known about acceptability and impact of resistance exercise breaks on these outcomes. Therefore, we evaluated the acceptability of resistance exercise breaks and their influence on discomfort, physical and mental fatigue, and sleepiness during occupational sitting.
Methods:
Workers completed two 4-hour conditions in random order: prolonged sitting (SIT) and sitting with hourly resistance exercise breaks (REX). All outcomes were measured at baseline and every hour thereafter with five total breaks. Linear mixed models evaluated overall condition effects and differences at each hour. Cohen’s d estimated magnitudes of effect. Acceptability was assessed via questionnaire after the REX condition and reported as percentages.
Findings:
Fourteen adults (age: 53.4 ± 9.5 years, body mass index [BMI]: 30.9 ± 4.8 kg/m2) were enrolled. Although ratings of discomfort, fatigue, and sleepiness were typically lower during REX as compared with SIT, overall outcomes were not significantly different between conditions (p > .05). However, a significant reduction in mental fatigue at hour 4 in favor of the REX condition (β = −0.48 log-points, p < .05, d = 0.37) was observed. Program acceptability questions revealed the majority (>50%) of participants reported a “4” or “5” on a 5-point Likert-type scale for all questions, indicating high acceptability for implementation.
Conclusions/Application to Practice:
Resistance exercise breaks had high acceptability and provided preliminary evidence of improving ratings of mental fatigue. More research is needed to better understand the role of resistance training to reduce sedentary behavior.
Objective: Reducing sedentary behavior is an important public health concern. The purpose of this study was to explore motivation to acquire a standing desk and strategies for using a standing desk through one-on-one interviews.
Methods: Thirty-seven university employees (89% staff; 51% female) participated in the study. Data were collected using a semi-structured interview guide and brief demographic questionnaire.
Results: Data analysis yielded five themes about motivation to acquire a standing desk: (1) pain management; (2) health risk; (3) movement opportunity; (4) workspace flexibility, and (5) productivity and three themes about typical use strategy: (1) task-dependent; (2) time-dependent; and (3) threshold.
Conclusions: Motivating factors for using a standing desk should be considered when encouraging standing desk use. Interventions should provide realistic strategies to establish a sit-stand routine that address employees’ unique job demands and preferences.
Background:
This systematic review assessed evidence on the accelerometer-measured sedentary and physical activity (PA) behavior of nonoffice workers in "blue-collar" industries.
Methods:
The databases CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Scopus were searched up to April 6, 2018. Eligibility criteria were accelerometer-measured sedentary, sitting, and/or PA behaviors in "blue-collar" workers (≥10 participants; agricultural, construction, cleaning, manufacturing, mining, postal, or transport industries). Data on participants' characteristics, study protocols, and measured behaviors during work and/or nonwork time were extracted. Methodologic quality was assessed using a 12-item checklist.
Results:
Twenty studies (representing 11 data sets), all from developed world economies, met inclusion criteria. The mean quality score for selected studies was 9.5 (SD 0.8) out of a maximum of 12. Data were analyzed using a range of analytical techniques (eg, accelerometer counts or pattern recognition algorithms). "Blue-collar" workers were more sedentary and less active during nonwork compared with work time (eg, sitting 5.7 vs 3.2 h/d; moderate to vigorous PA 0.5 vs 0.7 h/d). Drivers were the most sedentary (work time 5.1 h/d; nonwork time 8.2 h/d).
Conclusions:
High levels of sedentary time and insufficient PA to offset risk are health issues for "blue-collar" workers. To better inform interventions, research groups need to adopt common measurement and reporting methodologies.
Background: Workplace interventions have utilized standing desks to reduce sedentary behavior. However, minimal information is available concerning factors that impact use of standing desks under real working conditions. Purpose: To qualitatively explore factors that influence standing desk use under real working conditions. Methods: Individual interviews were conducted with university employees currently using a standing desk using a semi-structured interview guide. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and coded for themes. Results: Participants (n = 37) identified factors impacting standing desk use across multiple socioecological levels. Intrapersonal-level barriers included forgetting to use the standing desk and pain or fatigue from standing; whereas, knowledge facilitated use. Social support facilitated use at the interpersonal level, but social norms were a barrier to standing. Access to standing desks and a wellness culture facilitated use at the institutional level, but the built environment was a barrier. Discussion: Findings from this study support a socioecological perspective of sedentary behavior and highlight the importance of incorporating intervention strategies at multiple levels to change sedentary behavior. Translation to Health Education Practice: The findings from this study may be used to develop multi-level strategies to initiate and maintain use of standing desks in order to overcome and prevent barriers impacting regular use.
Moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity has an established preventive role in cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and some cancers. However, recent epidemiologic evidence suggests that sitting time has deleterious cardiovascular and metabolic effects that are independent of whether adults meet physical activity guidelines. Evidence from "inactivity physiology" laboratory studies has identified unique mechanisms that are distinct from the biologic bases of exercising. Opportunities for sedentary behaviors are ubiquitous and are likely to increase with further innovations in technologies. We present a compelling selection of emerging evidence on the deleterious effects of sedentary behavior, as it is underpinned by the unique physiology of inactivity. It is time to consider excessive sitting a serious health hazard, with the potential for ultimately giving consideration to the inclusion of too much sitting (or too few breaks from sitting) in physical activity and health guidelines.
Objective:
Total sedentary (absence of whole-body movement) time is associated with obesity, abnormal glucose metabolism, and the metabolic syndrome. In addition to the effects of total sedentary time, the manner in which it is accumulated may also be important. We examined the association of breaks in objectively measured sedentary time with biological markers of metabolic risk.
Research design and methods:
Participants (n = 168, mean age 53.4 years) for this cross-sectional study were recruited from the 2004-2005 Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle study. Sedentary time was measured by an accelerometer (counts/minute(-1) < 100) worn during waking hours for seven consecutive days. Each interruption in sedentary time (counts/min > or = 100) was considered a break. Fasting plasma glucose, 2-h plasma glucose, serum triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, weight, height, waist circumference, and resting blood pressure were measured. MatLab was used to derive the breaks variable; SPSS was used for the statistical analysis.
Results:
Independent of total sedentary time and moderate-to-vigorous intensity activity time, increased breaks in sedentary time were beneficially associated with waist circumference (standardized beta = -0.16, 95% CI -0.31 to -0.02, P = 0.026), BMI (beta = -0.19, -0.35 to -0.02, P = 0.026), triglycerides (beta = -0.18, -0.34 to -0.02, P = 0.029), and 2-h plasma glucose (beta = -0.18, -0.34 to -0.02, P = 0.025).
Conclusions:
This study provides evidence of the importance of avoiding prolonged uninterrupted periods of sedentary (primarily sitting) time. These findings suggest new public health recommendations regarding breaking up sedentary time that are complementary to those for physical activity.
This report presents the results of a systematic review of the effectiveness of worksite nutrition and physical activity programs to promote healthy weight among employees. These results form the basis for the recommendation by the Task Force on Community Preventive Services on the use of these interventions. Weight-related outcomes, including weight in pounds or kilograms, BMI, and percentage body fat were used to assess effectiveness of these programs. This review found that worksite nutrition and physical activity programs achieve modest improvements in employee weight status at the 6-12-month follow-up. A pooled effect estimate of -2.8 pounds (95% CI=-4.6, -1.0) was found based on nine RCTs, and a decrease in BMI of -0.5 (95% CI=-0.8, -0.2) was found based on six RCTs. The findings appear to be applicable to both male and female employees, across a range of worksite settings. Most of the studies combined informational and behavioral strategies to influence diet and physical activity; fewer studies modified the work environment (e.g., cafeteria, exercise facilities) to promote healthy choices. Information about other effects, barriers to implementation, cost and cost effectiveness of interventions, and research gaps are also presented in this article. The findings of this systematic review can help inform decisions of employers, planners, researchers, and other public health decision makers.
Research on physical activity and health has pointed clearly to increasing the time that adults spend doing moderate-to-vigorous intensity activities: 30 minutes a day is generally recommended. Recent evidence, however, underlines the importance of also focusing on sedentary behaviours -- the high volumes of time that adults spend sitting in their remaining 'non-exercise' waking hours. In the context of contemporary interest in physical activity and health, we provide a brief overview of recent evidence for the distinct relationships between 'too much sitting' and biomarkers of metabolic health, and thus with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and other prevalent chronic health problems. Particular concerns for this new field include the challenges of changing sedentary behaviours in the context of ubiquitous environmental and social drivers of sitting time; examining the effects of interventions for reducing or breaking-up sitting time; and, identifying the most-relevant implications for clinical and public health practice.
To study the relationships of time spent in sedentary occupations with the National Cholesterol Education Program-defined metabolic syndrome (MS), taking into account the habitual level of physical activity (PA).
This was a cross-sectional analysis in 1902 men and 1932 women 50 to 69 years of age participating in the French Supplementation with Antioxidant Vitamins and Minerals study. We assessed past-year PA, television watching or computer use, and reading during leisure with the Modifiable Activity Questionnaire. Subjects who performed at least 150 min/wk of moderate-intensity PA (3 to 6 metabolic equivalent tasks) or 60 min/wk of vigorous PA (>6 metabolic equivalent tasks) were considered as meeting recommended levels.
The frequency of most MS components increased with time spent in front of a screen and decreased with increasing PA levels. The likelihood to have MS, adjusted for age, education, and smoking, was decreased by one-third in subjects meeting moderate PA guidelines and by two-thirds in subjects meeting vigorous PA recommendations [odds ratio (95% CI), 0.34 (0.17 to 0.66) in women, 0.44 (0.28 to 0.68) in men] compared with those with insufficient PA. Independently of PA levels, time spent in front of a screen was positively associated with the likelihood to have the MS in women [odds ratio (95% CI), 3.30 (2.04 to 5.34)], whereas in both sexes, no association was found with time spent reading.
The relationship of the MS with a sedentary lifestyle differs according to sex and type of sedentary occupation. These results suggest the need to assess selected indicators of sedentary behavior in preventive programs.
Television viewing time, the predominant leisure-time sedentary behavior, is associated with biomarkers of cardiometabolic risk, but its relationship with mortality has not been studied. We examined the associations of prolonged television viewing time with all-cause, cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and non-CVD/noncancer mortality in Australian adults.
Television viewing time in relation to subsequent all-cause, CVD, and cancer mortality (median follow-up, 6.6 years) was examined among 8800 adults > or =25 years of age in the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). During 58 087 person-years of follow-up, there were 284 deaths (87 CVD deaths, 125 cancer deaths). After adjustment for age, sex, waist circumference, and exercise, the hazard ratios for each 1-hour increment in television viewing time per day were 1.11 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 1.20) for all-cause mortality, 1.18 (95% CI, 1.03 to 1.35) for CVD mortality, and 1.09 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.23) for cancer mortality. Compared with a television viewing time of <2 h/d, the fully adjusted hazard ratios for all-cause mortality were 1.13 (95% CI, 0.87 to 1.36) for > or =2 to <4 h/d and 1.46 (95% CI, 1.04 to 2.05) for > or =4 h/d. For CVD mortality, corresponding hazard ratios were 1.19 (95% CI, 0.72 to 1.99) and 1.80 (95% CI, 1.00 to 3.25). The associations with both cancer mortality and non-CVD/noncancer mortality were not significant.
Television viewing time was associated with increased risk of all-cause and CVD mortality. In addition to the promotion of exercise, chronic disease prevention strategies could focus on reducing sitting time, particularly prolonged television viewing.
Although independent relationships between sitting behaviors (mainly television viewing) and health outcomes have been reported, few studies have examined the measurement properties of self-report sitting questions. This study assessed gender-specific test-retest reliability and validity of a questionnaire that assessed time spent sitting on weekdays and weekend days: 1) traveling to and from places, 2) at work, 3) watching television, 4) using a computer at home, and 5) for leisure, not including television.
Test-retest reliability of domain-specific sitting time (min x d(-1)) on weekdays and weekend days was assessed using data collected on two occasions (median = 11 d apart). Validity of domain-specific self-reported sitting time on weekdays and weekend days was assessed against log data and sedentary accelerometer data.
Complete repeat questionnaire and log data were obtained from 157 women (aged 51-59 yr) and 96 men (aged 45-63 yr). Reliability coefficients were high for weekday sitting time at work, watching television, and using a computer at home (r = 0.84-0.78) but lower for weekend days across all domains (r = 0.23-0.74). Validity coefficients were highest for weekday sitting time at work and using a computer at home (r = 0.69-0.74). With the exception of computer use and watching television for women, validity of the weekend-day sitting time items was low.
This study confirms the importance of measuring domain- and day-specific sitting time. The measurement properties of questions that assess structured domain-specific and weekday sitting time were acceptable and may be used in future studies that aim to elucidate associations between domain-specific sitting and health outcomes.
Most adults do not achieve adequate physical activity levels. Despite the potential benefits of worksite health promotion, no previous comprehensive meta-analysis has summarized health and physical activity behavior outcomes from such programs. This comprehensive meta-analysis integrated the extant wide range of worksite physical activity intervention research.
Extensive searching located published and unpublished intervention studies reported from 1969 through 2007. Results were coded from primary studies. Random-effects meta-analytic procedures, including moderator analyses, were completed in 2008.
Effects on most variables were substantially heterogeneous because diverse studies were included. Standardized mean difference (d) effect sizes were synthesized across approximately 38,231 subjects. Significantly positive effects were observed for physical activity behavior (0.21); fitness (0.57); lipids (0.13); anthropometric measures (0.08); work attendance (0.19); and job stress (0.33). The significant effect size for diabetes risk (0.98) is less robust given small sample sizes. The mean effect size for fitness corresponds to a difference between treatment minus control subjects' means on VO2max of 3.5 mL/kg/min; for lipids, -0.2 on the ratio of total cholesterol to high-density lipoprotein; and for diabetes risk, -12.6 mg/dL on fasting glucose.
These findings document that some workplace physical activity interventions can improve both health and important worksite outcomes. Effects were variable for most outcomes, reflecting the diversity of primary studies. Future primary research should compare interventions to confirm causal relationships and further explore heterogeneity.
The increasingly sedentary nature of work and its impact on health and productivity indicators demands the promotion of physical activity at the worksite.
This paper aims to present considerations for broad-scale application of corporate strategies designed to promote physical activity among employees and their families through employer-sponsored initiatives.
The benefits of physical activity are multifold, including health and wellbeing and productivity related outcomes. The workplace setting may be leveraged to promote physical activity levels through frequent and sustained exposures to effective interventions that reach employees and, indirectly, their families. Furthermore, employers represent a powerful stakeholder group that should leverage its influence on health policy initiatives designed to create supportive environments inside the workplace as well as the broader community. Specific principles, recommendations for action, and considerations for the prioritization of initiatives are provided based on essential elements for comprehensive programs and health policy initiatives and in the context of a social-ecological model and supportive research.
Physical activity promotion at the worksite should be an integrated initiative that measurably improves worker health and enhances business performance.
Although moderate-to-vigorous physical activity is related to premature mortality, the relationship between sedentary behaviors and mortality has not been fully explored and may represent a different paradigm than that associated with lack of exercise. We prospectively examined sitting time and mortality in a representative sample of 17,013 Canadians 18-90 yr of age.
Evaluation of daily sitting time (almost none of the time, one fourth of the time, half of the time, three fourths of the time, almost all of the time), leisure time physical activity, smoking status, and alcohol consumption was conducted at baseline. Participants were followed prospectively for an average of 12.0 yr for the ascertainment of mortality status.
There were 1832 deaths (759 of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and 547 of cancer) during 204,732 person-yr of follow-up. After adjustment for potential confounders, there was a progressively higher risk of mortality across higher levels of sitting time from all causes (hazard ratios (HR): 1.00, 1.00, 1.11, 1.36, 1.54; P for trend <0.0001) and CVD (HR:1.00, 1.01, 1.22, 1.47, 1.54; P for trend <0.0001) but not cancer. Similar results were obtained when stratified by sex, age, smoking status, and body mass index. Age-adjusted all-cause mortality rates per 10,000 person-yr of follow-up were 87, 86, 105, 130, and 161 (P for trend <0.0001) in physically inactive participants and 75, 69, 76, 98, 105 (P for trend = 0.008) in active participants across sitting time categories.
These data demonstrate a dose-response association between sitting time and mortality from all causes and CVD, independent of leisure time physical activity. In addition to the promotion of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and a healthy weight, physicians should discourage sitting for extended periods.
The aim of this prospective study was to examine the link between individual and ecological workplace social capital and the co-occurrence of adverse lifestyle risk factors such as smoking, heavy drinking, physical inactivity and overweight.
Data on 25 897 female and 5476 male public sector employees were analysed. Questionnaire surveys conducted in 2000-2002 (baseline) and 2004-2005 (follow-up) were used to assess workplace social capital, lifestyle risk factors and other characteristics. Multilevel multinomial logistic regression analysis was used to examine associations between individual and ecological social capital and the co-occurrence of lifestyle risk factors.
In the cross-sectional analysis adjusted for age, sex, marital status and employer, low social capital at work at both the individual and ecological level was associated with at least a 1.3 times higher odds of having more than two lifestyle risk factors versus having no risk factors. Similar associations were found in the prospective setting. However, additional adjustment for the co-occurrence of risk factors and socioeconomic status at baseline attenuated the result to non-significant.
Social capital at work seems to be associated with a lowered risk of co-occurrence of multiple lifestyle risk factors but does not clearly predict the future risk of this co-occurrence.
Studies that did not directly measure sedentary behavior often have been used to draw conclusions about the health effects of sedentariness. Future claims about the effects of sedentary, light, and moderate-to-vigorous activities on health outcomes should be supported by data from studies in which all levels of physical activity are differentiated clearly and measured independently.
Current public health campaigns to reduce obesity and type 2 diabetes have largely focused on increasing exercise, but have paid little attention to the reduction of sedentary behaviors.
To examine the relationship between various sedentary behaviors, especially prolonged television (TV) watching, and risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes in women.
Prospective cohort study conducted from 1992 to 1998 among women from 11 states in the Nurses' Health Study. The obesity analysis included 50 277 women who had a body mass index (BMI) of less than 30 and were free from diagnosed cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or cancer and completed questions on physical activity and sedentary behaviors at baseline. The diabetes analysis included 68 497 women who at baseline were free from diagnosed diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, or cancer.
Onset of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus.
During 6 years of follow-up, 3757 (7.5%) of 50 277 women who had a BMI of less than 30 in 1992 became obese (BMI > or =30). Overall, we documented 1515 new cases of type 2 diabetes. Time spent watching TV was positively associated with risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes. In the multivariate analyses adjusting for age, smoking, exercise levels, dietary factors, and other covariates, each 2-h/d increment in TV watching was associated with a 23% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17%-30%) increase in obesity and a 14% (95% CI, 5%-23%) increase in risk of diabetes; each 2-h/d increment in sitting at work was associated with a 5% (95% CI, 0%-10%) increase in obesity and a 7% (95% CI, 0%-16%) increase in diabetes. In contrast, standing or walking around at home (2 h/d) was associated with a 9% (95% CI, 6%-12%) reduction in obesity and a 12% (95% CI, 7%-16%) reduction in diabetes. Each 1 hour per day of brisk walking was associated with a 24% (95% CI, 19%-29%) reduction in obesity and a 34% (95% CI, 27%-41%) reduction in diabetes. We estimated that in our cohort, 30% (95% CI, 24%-36%) of new cases of obesity and 43% (95% CI, 32%-52%) of new cases of diabetes could be prevented by adopting a relatively active lifestyle (<10 h/wk of TV watching and > or =30 min/d of brisk walking).
Independent of exercise levels, sedentary behaviors, especially TV watching, were associated with significantly elevated risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes, whereas even light to moderate activity was associated with substantially lower risk. This study emphasizes the importance of reducing prolonged TV watching and other sedentary behaviors for preventing obesity and diabetes.
This study aimed to assess sitting time and number of steps taken each day, and the relationships between these variables, in a sample of working Australian adults. Workers (N = 185) wore a pedometer for 7 days and recorded the number of steps taken and time spent sitting each day. Average time spent sitting on weekdays was 9.4 (SD = 2.40) hr, with about half spent sitting at work. Despite this, the average steps taken each day (M = 8,873, SD = 2,757) was higher on weekdays than on weekend days. There was a clear inverse relationship between sitting time at work and number of steps taken on weekdays, r = -.34, p < .001); those in the highest tertile for sitting time reported about 3,000 fewer daily steps. Workers in managerial and professional occupations reported more time sitting at work (M = 6.2 hr per day) and lower weekday step counts (M = 7,883, N = 43) than technical (M = 3.3 hr sitting at work and 10,731 weekday steps, N = 33) and blue collar workers (M = 1.6 hours sitting and 11,784 steps, N = 11). The findings suggest those whose daily work involves long hours of sitting should be the focus of efforts to promote physical activity both within and outside the workplace.
Using a randomised control trial design, this study assessed the impact of two walking interventions, on the work day step counts and health of UK academic and administrative, university employees.
A convenience sample of 58 women (age 42+/-10 years) and 6 men (age 40+/-11 years) completed baseline and intervention measures for step counts, % body fat, waist circumference and systolic/diastolic blood pressure, during a ten-week period (October to December, 2005). Before intervention, baseline step counts (five working days) were used to randomly allocate participants to a control (maintain normal behaviour, n=22) and two treatment groups ("walking routes", n=21; "walking in tasks", n=21). Intervention effects were evaluated by calculating differences between pre-intervention and intervention data. A one-way ANOVA analysed significant differences between groups.
A significant intervention effect (p<0.002) was found for step counts, with mean differences indicating a decrease in steps for the control group (-767 steps/day) and increases in the "walking routes" (+926 steps/day) and "walking in tasks" (+997 steps/day) groups. Small, non-significant changes were found in % body fat, waist circumference and blood pressure.
Findings have implications for work-based physical activity promotion and the development of walking interventions within the completion of work-based tasks.
For many people, most of the working day is spent sitting in front of a computer screen. Approaches for obesity treatment and prevention are being sought to increase workplace physical activity because low levels of physical activity are associated with obesity. Our hypothesis was that a vertical workstation that allows an obese individual to work while walking would be associated with significant and substantial increases in energy expenditure over seated work.
The vertical workstation is a workstation that allows an office worker to use a standard personal computer while walking on a treadmill at a self-selected velocity. 15 sedentary individuals with obesity (14 women, one man; 43 (7.5) years, 86 (9.6) kg; body mass index 32 (2.6) kg/m(2)) underwent measurements of energy expenditure at rest, seated working in an office chair, standing and while walking at a self-selected speed using the vertical workstation. Body composition was measured using dual x ray absorptiometry.
The mean (SD) energy expenditure while seated at work in an office chair was 72 (10) kcal/h, whereas the energy expenditure while walking and working at a self-selected velocity of 1.1 (0.4) mph was 191 (29) kcal/h. The mean (SD) increase in energy expenditure for walking-and-working over sitting was 119 (25) kcal/h.
If sitting computer-time were replaced by walking-and-working, energy expenditure could increase by 100 kcal/h. Thus, if obese individuals were to replace time spent sitting at the computer with walking computer time by 2-3 h/day, and if other components of energy balance were constant, a weight loss of 20-30 kg/year could occur.
This study expanded previous NIOSH-IRS research examining the effects of rest breaks and stretching exercises on symptoms and performance in data-entry workers.
All workers spent 4 weeks with conventional breaks (two 15 min breaks per day) and 4 weeks with supplementary breaks (two 15 min breaks plus four 5 min breaks per day). One-half were assigned at random to a group instructed to perform brief stretching exercises during breaks. The remainder comprised the "no stretching" (control) group.
51 workers (stretch group n = 21; no stretch group n = 30) completed the study symptom questionnaires. Discomfort and eyestrain were significantly lower with supplementary breaks, and supplementary breaks attenuated accumulation of discomfort and eyestrain during work sessions. Data-entry speed was significantly faster with supplementary breaks so that work output was maintained, despite replacing 20 min of work time with break time. In the stretch group, workers reported stretching during only 25% of conventional breaks and 39% of supplementary breaks, and no significant effects of stretching on discomfort or performance were observed.
These results provide further converging evidence that supplementary breaks reliably minimize discomfort and eyestrain without impairing productivity. Low compliance in performing stretches prevented valid assessment of stretching effects. Further research on stretching exercises and exercise compliance is warranted.
To assess the relationship among recreational physical activity (PA), non-occupational sedentary behavior, and 7-year weight gain among postmenopausal U.S. women 40 to 69 years old.
In 1992 and 1999, 18,583 healthy female participants from the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort completed questionnaires on anthropometric characteristics and lifestyle factors. The associations between recreational PA [in metabolic equivalent (MET) hours per week] and non-occupational sedentary behavior (in hours per day) at baseline and risk for 7-year weight gain (5 to 9 or >or =10 vs. +/-4 pounds) were assessed using multivariate logistic regression analysis.
Neither PA nor sedentary behavior was associated with a 5- to 9-pound weight gain. Among women who were not overweight at baseline (BMI <25.0), the odds of > or =10-pound weight gain were 12% lower (odds ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.77 to 0.99) for those in the highest category of recreational PA (> or =18 MET h/wk) compared with >0 to <4 MET h/wk; odds were 47% higher (odds ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 1.79) for non-overweight women who reported > or =6 h/d of non-occupational sedentary behavior compared with <3 h/d. Neither PA nor sedentary behavior were associated with risk of > or =10-pound weight gain weight among women who were overweight at baseline (BMI > or =25.0).
Both recreational PA and non-occupational sedentary behavior independently predicted risk of > or =10-pound weight gain among postmenopausal women who were not overweight at baseline. Public health messages to prevent weight gain among normal-weight postmenopausal women may need to focus on decreasing time spent in sedentary behaviors and increasing the amount of time spent on PA.
It is not uncommon for people to spend one-half of their waking day sitting, with relatively idle muscles. The other half of the day includes the often large volume of nonexercise physical activity. Given the increasing pace of technological change in domestic, community, and workplace environments, modern humans may still not have reached the historical pinnacle of physical inactivity, even in cohorts where people already do not perform exercise. Our purpose here is to examine the role of sedentary behaviors, especially sitting, on mortality, cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome risk factors, and obesity. Recent observational epidemiological studies strongly suggest that daily sitting time or low nonexercise activity levels may have a significant direct relationship with each of these medical concerns. There is now a need for studies to differentiate between the potentially unique molecular, physiologic, and clinical effects of too much sitting (inactivity physiology) separate from the responses caused by structured exercise (exercise physiology). In theory, this may be in part because nonexercise activity thermogenesis is generally a much greater component of total energy expenditure than exercise or because any type of brief, yet frequent, muscular contraction throughout the day may be necessary to short-circuit unhealthy molecular signals causing metabolic diseases. One of the first series of controlled laboratory studies providing translational evidence for a molecular reason to maintain high levels of daily low-intensity and intermittent activity came from examinations of the cellular regulation of skeletal muscle lipoprotein lipase (LPL) (a protein important for controlling plasma triglyceride catabolism, HDL cholesterol, and other metabolic risk factors). Experimentally reducing normal spontaneous standing and ambulatory time had a much greater effect on LPL regulation than adding vigorous exercise training on top of the normal level of nonexercise activity. Those studies also found that inactivity initiated unique cellular processes that were qualitatively different from the exercise responses. In summary, there is an emergence of inactivity physiology studies. These are beginning to raise a new concern with potentially major clinical and public health significance: the average nonexercising person may become even more metabolically unfit in the coming years if they sit too much, thereby limiting the normally high volume of intermittent nonexercise physical activity in everyday life. Thus, if the inactivity physiology paradigm is proven to be true, the dire concern for the future may rest with growing numbers of people unaware of the potential insidious dangers of sitting too much and who are not taking advantage of the benefits of maintaining nonexercise activity throughout much of the day.