OBJECTIVE: To examine the acceptability of introducing standing workstations in elementary-school classrooms; and to quantify changes in children's time spent sitting, standing, and walking; step counts; sit-to-stand transitions; and musculoskeletal discomfort. METHODS: A controlled trial was conducted in two elementary schools in Auckland, New Zealand (March-May 2012). Participants were 30 third and fourth graders (n = 23 intervention, n = 7 control). Intervention classes received standing workstations; control class retained usual sitting desks. Children wore ActivPAL monitors over 7 days at baseline and during the fourth week of the intervention. RESULTS: Children spoke enthusiastically of the standing workstations. School staffs were supportive of the standing workstations because they offered "flexibility in learning". Overall, children in the intervention group sat less (intervention: 8.27 (1.45), mean (SD); control: 9.00 (0.80) h/day), stood longer (3.75 (0.88); 2.85 (0.30) h/day), and engaged in fewer transitions from sitting to standing (93 (17); 98 (26) counts) compared to the control group. Effect size ranged from small-large (-0.49; 95% confidence limits (0.64)%, 0.71; (0.48), -0.96; (0.54)% respectively). Results for time spent stepping and step counts were unclear. CONCLUSION:Standing workstations can be successfully integrated in classroom environments and appear to decrease overall sedentariness.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the acceptability of introducing standing workstations in elementary-school classrooms; and to quantify changes in children's time spent sitting, standing, and walking; step counts; sit-to-stand transitions; and musculoskeletal discomfort. METHODS: A controlled trial was conducted in two elementary schools in Auckland, New Zealand (March-May 2012). Participants were 30 third and fourth graders (n = 23 intervention, n = 7 control). Intervention classes received standing workstations; control class retained usual sitting desks. Children wore ActivPAL monitors over 7 days at baseline and during the fourth week of the intervention. RESULTS:Children spoke enthusiastically of the standing workstations. School staffs were supportive of the standing workstations because they offered "flexibility in learning". Overall, children in the intervention group sat less (intervention: 8.27 (1.45), mean (SD); control: 9.00 (0.80) h/day), stood longer (3.75 (0.88); 2.85 (0.30) h/day), and engaged in fewer transitions from sitting to standing (93 (17); 98 (26) counts) compared to the control group. Effect size ranged from small-large (-0.49; 95% confidence limits (0.64)%, 0.71; (0.48), -0.96; (0.54)% respectively). Results for time spent stepping and step counts were unclear. CONCLUSION: Standing workstations can be successfully integrated in classroom environments and appear to decrease overall sedentariness.
Authors: Erica Hinckson; Jo Salmon; Mark Benden; Stacey A Clemes; Bronwyn Sudholz; Sally E Barber; Saeideh Aminian; Nicola D Ridgers Journal: Sports Med Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: Stacy A Clemes; Sally E Barber; Daniel D Bingham; Nicola D Ridgers; Elly Fletcher; Natalie Pearson; Jo Salmon; David W Dunstan Journal: J Public Health (Oxf) Date: 2015-06-14 Impact factor: 2.341
Authors: Alexander L Wallace; Ann M Swartz; Chi C Cho; Christine M Kaiver; Ryan M Sullivan; Krista M Lisdahl Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-07 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Karl E Minges; Ariana M Chao; Melinda L Irwin; Neville Owen; Chorong Park; Robin Whittemore; Jo Salmon Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-01-22 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Roberto M Benzo; Allene L Gremaud; Matthew Jerome; Lucas J Carr Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-08-15 Impact factor: 3.390