BACKGROUND: Epidemiological research has established sitting as a new risk factor for the development of non-communicable chronic disease. Sit-stand desks have been proposed as one strategy to reduce occupational sedentary time. This formative research study evaluated the acceptability and usability of manually and electrically operated sit-stand desks in a medium-sized government organisation located in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Sitting time pre- and three months post -installation of the sit-stand desks was measured using validated self-report measures. Additionally, three group interviews and one key-informant interview were conducted with staff regarding perceptions about ease of, and barriers to, use and satisfaction with the sit-stand desks. All interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed for themes regarding usability and acceptability. RESULTS: Of 31 staff, 18 completed baseline questionnaires, and 13 completed follow-up questionnaires. The median proportion of sitting time for work was 85% (range 50%-95%) at baseline and 60% (range 10%-95%) at follow-up. Formal statistical testing of paired data (n=11) showed that the change from baseline to follow-up in time spent sitting (mean change=1.7 hours, p=.014) was statistically significant. From the qualitative data, reasons given for initiating use of the desks in the standing position were the potential health benefits, or a willingness to experiment or through external prompting. Factors influencing continued use included: concern for, and experience of, short and long term health impacts; perceived productivity whilst sitting and standing; practical accommodation of transitions between sitting and standing; electric or manual operation height adjustment. Several trajectories in patterns of initiation and continued use were identified that centered on the source and timing of commitment to using the desk in the standing position. CONCLUSIONS: Sit-stand desks had high usability and acceptability and reduced sitting time at work. Use could be promoted by emphasizing the health benefits, providing guidance on appropriate set-up and normalizing standing for work-related tasks.
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological research has established sitting as a new risk factor for the development of non-communicable chronic disease. Sit-stand desks have been proposed as one strategy to reduce occupational sedentary time. This formative research study evaluated the acceptability and usability of manually and electrically operated sit-stand desks in a medium-sized government organisation located in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Sitting time pre- and three months post -installation of the sit-stand desks was measured using validated self-report measures. Additionally, three group interviews and one key-informant interview were conducted with staff regarding perceptions about ease of, and barriers to, use and satisfaction with the sit-stand desks. All interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed for themes regarding usability and acceptability. RESULTS: Of 31 staff, 18 completed baseline questionnaires, and 13 completed follow-up questionnaires. The median proportion of sitting time for work was 85% (range 50%-95%) at baseline and 60% (range 10%-95%) at follow-up. Formal statistical testing of paired data (n=11) showed that the change from baseline to follow-up in time spent sitting (mean change=1.7 hours, p=.014) was statistically significant. From the qualitative data, reasons given for initiating use of the desks in the standing position were the potential health benefits, or a willingness to experiment or through external prompting. Factors influencing continued use included: concern for, and experience of, short and long term health impacts; perceived productivity whilst sitting and standing; practical accommodation of transitions between sitting and standing; electric or manual operation height adjustment. Several trajectories in patterns of initiation and continued use were identified that centered on the source and timing of commitment to using the desk in the standing position. CONCLUSIONS: Sit-stand desks had high usability and acceptability and reduced sitting time at work. Use could be promoted by emphasizing the health benefits, providing guidance on appropriate set-up and normalizing standing for work-related tasks.
Authors: Josephine Y Chau; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Jannique G Z van Uffelen; Jason Wong; Ingrid Riphagen; Genevieve N Healy; Nicholas D Gilson; David W Dunstan; Adrian E Bauman; Neville Owen; Wendy J Brown Journal: Prev Med Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Jannique G Z van Uffelen; Jason Wong; Josephine Y Chau; Hidde P van der Ploeg; Ingrid Riphagen; Nicholas D Gilson; Nicola W Burton; Genevieve N Healy; Alicia A Thorp; Bronwyn K Clark; Paul A Gardiner; David W Dunstan; Adrian Bauman; Neville Owen; Wendy J Brown Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Genevieve N Healy; David W Dunstan; Jo Salmon; Ester Cerin; Jonathan E Shaw; Paul Z Zimmet; Neville Owen Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2008-02-05 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Katharina Wick; Oliver Faude; Susanne Schwager; Lukas Zahner; Lars Donath Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Lidewij R Renaud; Erwin M Speklé; Allard J van der Beek; Hidde P van der Ploeg; H Roeline Pasman; Maaike A Huysmans Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ariel Bodker; Alexis Visotcky; David Gutterman; Michael E Widlansky; Jacquelyn Kulinski Journal: Vasc Med Date: 2021-04-05 Impact factor: 4.739
Authors: Lars Donath; Oliver Faude; Yannick Schefer; Ralf Roth; Lukas Zahner Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2015-04-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Josephine Y Chau; Michelle Daley; Scott Dunn; Anu Srinivasan; Anna Do; Adrian E Bauman; Hidde P van der Ploeg Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Lee E F Graves; Rebecca C Murphy; Sam O Shepherd; Josephine Cabot; Nicola D Hopkins Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2015-11-19 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Maike Neuhaus; Genevieve N Healy; Brianna S Fjeldsoe; Sheleigh Lawler; Neville Owen; David W Dunstan; Anthony D LaMontagne; Elizabeth G Eakin Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Josephine Y Chau; Michelle Daley; Anu Srinivasan; Scott Dunn; Adrian E Bauman; Hidde P van der Ploeg Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-07-25 Impact factor: 3.295