BACKGROUND: To determine whether alternating bouts of sitting and standing at work influences daily workplace energy expenditure (EE). METHODS:Twenty-three overweight/obese office workers (mean ± SD; age: 48.2 ± 7.9 y, body mass index: 29.6 ± 4.0 kg/m2) undertook two 5-day experimental conditions in an equal, randomized order. Participants wore a "metabolic armband" (SenseWear Armband Mini) to estimate daily workplace EE (KJ/8 h) while working (1) in a seated work posture (SIT condition) or (2) alternating between a standing and seated work posture every 30 minutes using a sit-stand workstation (STAND-SIT condition). To assess the validity of the metabolic armband, a criterion measure of acute EE (KJ/min; indirect calorimetry) was performed on day 4 of each condition. RESULTS: Standing to work acutely increased EE by 0.7 [95% CI 0.3-1.0] KJ/min (13%), relative to sitting (P = .002). Compared with indirect calorimetry, the metabolic armband provided a valid estimate of EE while standing to work (mean bias: 0.1 [-0.3 to 0.4] KJ/min) but modestly overestimated EE while sitting (P = .005). Daily workplace EE was greatest during the STAND-SIT condition (mean condition difference [95% CI]: 76 [8-144] KJ/8-h workday, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent standing at work can modestly increase daily workplace EE compared with seated work in overweight/obese office workers.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: To determine whether alternating bouts of sitting and standing at work influences daily workplace energy expenditure (EE). METHODS: Twenty-three overweight/obese office workers (mean ± SD; age: 48.2 ± 7.9 y, body mass index: 29.6 ± 4.0 kg/m2) undertook two 5-day experimental conditions in an equal, randomized order. Participants wore a "metabolic armband" (SenseWear Armband Mini) to estimate daily workplace EE (KJ/8 h) while working (1) in a seated work posture (SIT condition) or (2) alternating between a standing and seated work posture every 30 minutes using a sit-stand workstation (STAND-SIT condition). To assess the validity of the metabolic armband, a criterion measure of acute EE (KJ/min; indirect calorimetry) was performed on day 4 of each condition. RESULTS: Standing to work acutely increased EE by 0.7 [95% CI 0.3-1.0] KJ/min (13%), relative to sitting (P = .002). Compared with indirect calorimetry, the metabolic armband provided a valid estimate of EE while standing to work (mean bias: 0.1 [-0.3 to 0.4] KJ/min) but modestly overestimated EE while sitting (P = .005). Daily workplace EE was greatest during the STAND-SIT condition (mean condition difference [95% CI]: 76 [8-144] KJ/8-h workday, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent standing at work can modestly increase daily workplace EE compared with seated work in overweight/obese office workers.
Authors: Mark S Tremblay; Salomé Aubert; Joel D Barnes; Travis J Saunders; Valerie Carson; Amy E Latimer-Cheung; Sebastien F M Chastin; Teatske M Altenburg; Mai J M Chinapaw Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2017-06-10 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Francisco J Amaro-Gahete; Guillermo Sanchez-Delgado; Juan M A Alcantara; Borja Martinez-Tellez; Francisco M Acosta; Elisa Merchan-Ramirez; Marie Löf; Idoia Labayen; Jonatan R Ruiz Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Charlotte L Brakenridge; Brianna S Fjeldsoe; Duncan C Young; Elisabeth A H Winkler; David W Dunstan; Leon M Straker; Christian J Brakenridge; Genevieve N Healy Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2016-05-25