Literature DB >> 26984326

Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.

Nipun Shrestha1, Katriina T Kukkonen-Harjula, Jos H Verbeek, Sharea Ijaz, Veerle Hermans, Soumyadeep Bhaumik.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Office work has changed considerably over the previous couple of decades and has become sedentary in nature. Physical inactivity at workplaces and particularly increased sitting has been linked to increase in cardiovascular disease, obesity and overall mortality.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of workplace interventions to reduce sitting at work compared to no intervention or alternative interventions. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, OSH UPDATE, PsycINFO, Clinical trials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal up to 2 June, 2015. We also screened reference lists of articles and contacted authors to find more studies to include. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs), and quasi-randomised controlled trials of interventions to reduce sitting at work. For changes of workplace arrangements, we also included controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) with a concurrent control group. The primary outcome was time spent sitting at work per day, either self-reported or objectively measured by means of an accelerometer-inclinometer. We considered energy expenditure, duration and number of sitting episodes lasting 30 minutes or more, work productivity and adverse events as secondary outcomes. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles for study eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted authors for additional data where required. MAIN
RESULTS: We included 20 studies, two cross-over RCTs, 11 RCTs, three cRCTs and four CBAs, with a total of 2180 participants from high income nations. The studies evaluated physical workplace changes (nine studies), policy changes (two studies), information and counselling (seven studies) and interventions from multiple categories (two studies). One study had both physical workplace changes and information and counselling components. We did not find any studies that had investigated the effect of periodic breaks or standing or walking meetings. Physical workplace changesA sit-stand desk alone compared to no intervention reduced sitting time at work per workday with between thirty minutes to two hours at short term (up to three months) follow-up (six studies, 218 participants, very low quality evidence). In two studies, sit-stand desks with additional counselling reduced sitting time at work in the same range at short-term follow-up (61 participants, very low quality evidence). One study found a reduction at six months' follow-up of -56 minutes (95% CI -101 to -12, very low quality evidence) compared to no intervention. Also total sitting time at work and outside work decreased with sit-stand desks compared to no intervention (MD -78 minutes, 95% CI -125 to -31, one study) as did the duration of sitting episodes lasting 30 minutes or more (MD -52 minutes, 95% CI -79 to -26, two studies). This is considerably less than the two to four hours recommended by experts. Sit-stand desks did not have a considerable effect on work performance, musculoskeletal symptoms or sick leave. It remains unclear if standing can repair the harms of sitting because there is hardly any extra energy expenditure.The effects of active workstations were inconsistent. Treadmill desks combined with counselling reduced sitting time at work (MD -29 minutes, 95% CI -55 to -2, one study) compared to no intervention at 12 weeks' follow-up. Pedalling workstations combined with information did not reduce inactive sitting at work considerably (MD -12 minutes, 95% CI -24 to 1, one study) compared to information alone at 16 weeks' follow-up. The quality of evidence was low for active workstations. Policy changesTwo studies with 443 participants provided low quality evidence that walking strategies did not have a considerable effect on workplace sitting time at 10 weeks' (MD -16 minutes, 95% CI -54 to 23) or 21 weeks' (MD -17 minutes, 95% CI -58 to 25) follow-up respectively. Information and counsellingCounselling reduced sitting time at work (MD -28 minutes, 95% CI -52 to -5, two studies, low quality evidence) at medium term (three months to 12 months) follow-up. Mindfulness training did not considerably reduce workplace sitting time (MD -2 minutes, 95% CI -22 to 18) at six months' follow-up and at 12 months' follow-up (MD -16 minutes, 95% CI -45 to 12, one study, low quality evidence). There was no considerable increase in work engagement with counselling.There was an inconsistent effect of computer prompting on sitting time at work. One study found no considerable effect on sitting at work (MD -17 minutes, 95% CI -48 to 14, low quality evidence) at 10 days' follow-up, while another study reported a significant reduction in sitting at work (MD -55 minutes, 95% CI -96 to -14, low quality evidence) at 13 weeks' follow-up. Computer prompts to stand reduced sitting at work by 14 minutes more (95% CI 10 to 19, one study) compared to computer prompts to step at six days' follow-up. Computer prompts did not change the number of sitting episodes that last 30 minutes or longer. Interventions from multiple categories Interventions combining multiple categories had an inconsistent effect on sitting time at work, with a reduction in sitting time at 12 weeks' (25 participants, very low quality evidence) and six months' (294 participants, low quality evidence) follow-up in two studies but no considerable effect at 12 months' follow-up in one study (MD -47.98, 95% CI -103 to 7, 294 participants, low quality evidence). AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: At present there is very low to low quality evidence that sit-stand desks may decrease workplace sitting between thirty minutes to two hours per day without having adverse effects at the short or medium term. There is no evidence on the effects in the long term. There were no considerable or inconsistent effects of other interventions such as changing work organisation or information and counselling. There is a need for cluster-randomised trials with a sufficient sample size and long term follow-up to determine the effectiveness of different types of interventions to reduce objectively measured sitting time at work.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26984326      PMCID: PMC6486221          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  150 in total

1.  Cluster trials in implementation research: estimation of intracluster correlation coefficients and sample size.

Authors:  M K Campbell; J Mollison; J M Grimshaw
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2001-02-15       Impact factor: 2.373

2.  Compendium of physical activities: an update of activity codes and MET intensities.

Authors:  B E Ainsworth; W L Haskell; M C Whitt; M L Irwin; A M Swartz; S J Strath; W L O'Brien; D R Bassett; K H Schmitz; P O Emplaincourt; D R Jacobs; A S Leon
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.411

3.  Exploring the effect of the environment on physical activity: a study examining walking to work.

Authors:  Cora L Craig; Ross C Brownson; Sue E Cragg; Andrea L Dunn
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 5.043

4.  Addressing overreporting on the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) telephone survey with a population sample.

Authors:  Randy Rzewnicki; Yves Vanden Auweele; Ilse De Bourdeaudhuij
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 4.022

Review 5.  Limits to the measurement of habitual physical activity by questionnaires.

Authors:  R J Shephard
Journal:  Br J Sports Med       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 13.800

6.  The effectiveness of physical activity counseling in a work-site setting. A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Minna Aittasalo; Seppo Miilunpalo; Jaana Suni
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2004-11

7.  Television watching and other sedentary behaviors in relation to risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus in women.

Authors:  Frank B Hu; Tricia Y Li; Graham A Colditz; Walter C Willett; JoAnn E Manson
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-04-09       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Validation of a new self-report instrument for measuring physical activity.

Authors:  Mette Aadahl; Torben Jørgensen
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.411

9.  The Los Angeles Lift Off: a sociocultural environmental change intervention to integrate physical activity into the workplace.

Authors:  Antronette K Yancey; William J McCarthy; Wendell C Taylor; Angela Merlo; Constance Gewa; Mark D Weber; Jonathan E Fielding
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.018

10.  Print versus website physical activity programs: a randomized trial.

Authors:  Alison L Marshall; Eva R Leslie; Adrian E Bauman; Bess H Marcus; Neville Owen
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 5.043

View more
  55 in total

Review 1.  The Impact of Obesity in the Workplace: a Review of Contributing Factors, Consequences and Potential Solutions.

Authors:  Nipun Shrestha; Zeljko Pedisic; Sarah Neil-Sztramko; Katriina T Kukkonen-Harjula; Veerle Hermans
Journal:  Curr Obes Rep       Date:  2016-09

Review 2.  Targeting Reductions in Sitting Time to Increase Physical Activity and Improve Health.

Authors:  Sarah K Keadle; David E Conroy; Matthew P Buman; David W Dunstan; Charles E Matthews
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 5.411

3.  Pre-existing low-back symptoms impact adversely on sitting time reduction in office workers.

Authors:  Pieter Coenen; Genevieve N Healy; Elisabeth A H Winkler; David W Dunstan; Neville Owen; Marj Moodie; Anthony D LaMontagne; Elizabeth A Eakin; Leon M Straker
Journal:  Int Arch Occup Environ Health       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.015

4.  Posture and Physical Activity Detection: Impact of Number of Sensors and Feature Type.

Authors:  Q U Tang; Dinesh John; Binod Thapa-Chhetry; Diego Jose Arguello; Stephen Intille
Journal:  Med Sci Sports Exerc       Date:  2020-08

5.  An intervention to reduce sitting and increase light-intensity physical activity at work: Design and rationale of the 'Stand & Move at Work' group randomized trial.

Authors:  Matthew P Buman; Sarah L Mullane; Meynard J Toledo; Sarah A Rydell; Glenn A Gaesser; Noe C Crespo; Peter Hannan; Linda Feltes; Brenna Vuong; Mark A Pereira
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 2.226

6.  Number of Chronic Medical Conditions Fully Mediates the Effects of Race on Mortality; 25-Year Follow-Up of a Nationally Representative Sample of Americans.

Authors:  Shervin Assari
Journal:  J Racial Ethn Health Disparities       Date:  2016-07-20

7.  Nonworksite Interventions to Reduce Sedentary Behavior among Adults: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Keith M Thraen-Borowski; Laura D Ellingson; Jacob D Meyer; Lisa Cadmus-Bertram
Journal:  Transl J Am Coll Sports Med       Date:  2017-06-15

8.  Health outcomes associated with reallocations of time between sleep, sedentary behaviour, and physical activity: a systematic scoping review of isotemporal substitution studies.

Authors:  Jozo Grgic; Dorothea Dumuid; Enrique Garcia Bengoechea; Nipun Shrestha; Adrian Bauman; Timothy Olds; Zeljko Pedisic
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2018-07-13       Impact factor: 6.457

9.  Interventions outside the workplace for reducing sedentary behaviour in adults under 60 years of age.

Authors:  Elaine M Murtagh; Marie H Murphy; Karen Milton; Nia W Roberts; Clodagh Sm O'Gorman; Charles Foster
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-07-17

10.  Learning to Stand: The Acceptability and Feasibility of Introducing Standing Desks into College Classrooms.

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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.