OBJECTIVE: To objectively measure physical activity (PA) patterns and sedentary time, and explore perceptions of workplace PA opportunities in regional male transport workers. METHODS: A multi-method study involving 28 drivers (52.4±9.69 years) working at a bus company in South-East Queensland, Australia. PA was measured using accelerometers (n=23) to determine the proportion of time spent in sedentary (<150 cpm), light (151-2,689 cpm) and moderate+ (≥2,690 cpm) intensity categories. Paired sample t-tests were used to evaluate differences between categories on a workday/off-workday (n=16), and during work/non-work time (n=15). Interviews were conducted with 28 drivers and six managers to explore perceptions and ideas relating to workplace PA opportunities. RESULTS: Sedentary time was significantly higher on off-work (64% of wear time) than work (52%) days (p<0.05), while the opposite was the case for light intensity time (off-workday=33%; workday=44%; p<0.05). On workdays, sedentary time was significantly lower when employees were working (44%) than when not working (60%; p<0.05). No significant differences were found for time spent in moderate+ PA. Driver perceptions indicated that PA opportunities (walking club and corporate gym membership) were being adopted by some drivers. However, at this depot, perceived health issues and organisational barriers (shift work and irregular driving routines), tended to preclude some drivers from engaging with these opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: Findings contest the notion that a sedentary occupation such as driving necessitates an inactive work environment. IMPLICATIONS: This research informs ongoing intervention efforts to target inactive drivers who are struggling to take advantage of existing workplace-related PA opportunities.
OBJECTIVE: To objectively measure physical activity (PA) patterns and sedentary time, and explore perceptions of workplace PA opportunities in regional male transport workers. METHODS: A multi-method study involving 28 drivers (52.4±9.69 years) working at a bus company in South-East Queensland, Australia. PA was measured using accelerometers (n=23) to determine the proportion of time spent in sedentary (<150 cpm), light (151-2,689 cpm) and moderate+ (≥2,690 cpm) intensity categories. Paired sample t-tests were used to evaluate differences between categories on a workday/off-workday (n=16), and during work/non-work time (n=15). Interviews were conducted with 28 drivers and six managers to explore perceptions and ideas relating to workplace PA opportunities. RESULTS: Sedentary time was significantly higher on off-work (64% of wear time) than work (52%) days (p<0.05), while the opposite was the case for light intensity time (off-workday=33%; workday=44%; p<0.05). On workdays, sedentary time was significantly lower when employees were working (44%) than when not working (60%; p<0.05). No significant differences were found for time spent in moderate+ PA. Driver perceptions indicated that PA opportunities (walking club and corporate gym membership) were being adopted by some drivers. However, at this depot, perceived health issues and organisational barriers (shift work and irregular driving routines), tended to preclude some drivers from engaging with these opportunities. CONCLUSIONS: Findings contest the notion that a sedentary occupation such as driving necessitates an inactive work environment. IMPLICATIONS: This research informs ongoing intervention efforts to target inactive drivers who are struggling to take advantage of existing workplace-related PA opportunities.
Authors: Jatta Puhkala; Katriina Kukkonen-Harjula; Minna Aittasalo; Kirsi Mansikkamäki; Markku Partinen; Christer Hublin; Paula Kärmeniemi; Mikael Sallinen; Seppo Olkkonen; Kari Tokola; Anna Ojala; Clas-Håkan Nygård; Mikael Fogelholm Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2016-08-15
Authors: Veronica Varela-Mato; Orlagh O'Shea; James A King; Thomas Yates; David J Stensel; Stuart Jh Biddle; Myra A Nimmo; Stacy A Clemes Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Stephanie A Prince; Cara G Elliott; Kyle Scott; Sarah Visintini; Jennifer L Reed Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Nyssa T Hadgraft; Charlotte L Brakenridge; David W Dunstan; Neville Owen; Genevieve N Healy; Sheleigh P Lawler Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 6.457