OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to systematically review work site-based, environmental interventions to reduce sedentary behavior following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCE: Data were extracted from Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science between January 2005 and December 2015. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were work site interventions, published in peer-reviewed journals, employing environmental modalities, targeting sedentary behavior, and using any quantitative design. Exclusion criteria were noninterventions and non-English publications. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extracted included study design, population, intervention dosage, intervention activities, evaluation measures, and intervention effects. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were tabulated quantitatively and synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of 15 articles were identified for review and 14 reported statistically significant decreases in sedentary behavior. The majority of studies employed a randomized controlled trial design (n = 7), used inclinometers to measure sedentary behavior (n = 9), recruited predominantly female samples (n = 15), and utilized sit-to-stand desks as the primary intervention modality (n = 10). The mean methodological quality score was 6.2 out of 10. CONCLUSION: Environmental work site interventions to reduce sedentary behavior show promise because work sites often have more control over environmental factors. Limitations of this intervention stream include inconsistent measurement of sedentary behavior, absence of theoretical frameworks to guide program development, and absence of long-term evaluation. Future studies should include clear reporting of intervention strategies and explicit operationalization of theoretical constructs.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to systematically review work site-based, environmental interventions to reduce sedentary behavior following preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines. DATA SOURCE: Data were extracted from Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science between January 2005 and December 2015. STUDY INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Inclusion criteria were work site interventions, published in peer-reviewed journals, employing environmental modalities, targeting sedentary behavior, and using any quantitative design. Exclusion criteria were noninterventions and non-English publications. DATA EXTRACTION: Data extracted included study design, population, intervention dosage, intervention activities, evaluation measures, and intervention effects. DATA SYNTHESIS: Data were tabulated quantitatively and synthesized qualitatively. RESULTS: A total of 15 articles were identified for review and 14 reported statistically significant decreases in sedentary behavior. The majority of studies employed a randomized controlled trial design (n = 7), used inclinometers to measure sedentary behavior (n = 9), recruited predominantly female samples (n = 15), and utilized sit-to-stand desks as the primary intervention modality (n = 10). The mean methodological quality score was 6.2 out of 10. CONCLUSION: Environmental work site interventions to reduce sedentary behavior show promise because work sites often have more control over environmental factors. Limitations of this intervention stream include inconsistent measurement of sedentary behavior, absence of theoretical frameworks to guide program development, and absence of long-term evaluation. Future studies should include clear reporting of intervention strategies and explicit operationalization of theoretical constructs.
Keywords:
effectiveness; environment; health promotion; intervention; literature review; sedentary behavior; work site; workplace
Authors: Pam Ten Broeke; Merlijn Olthof; Debby G J Beckers; Nicola D Hopkins; Lee E F Graves; Sophie E Carter; Madeleine Cochrane; David Gavin; Abigail S Morris; Anna Lichtwarck-Aschoff; Sabine A E Geurts; Dick H J Thijssen; Erik Bijleveld Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2020-06-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Viktoria Wahlström; David Olsson; Fredrik Öhberg; Tommy Olsson; Lisbeth Slunga Järvholm Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-12-08 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Tzeyu L Michaud; Wen You; Paul A Estabrooks; Krista Leonard; Sarah A Rydell; Sarah L Mullane; Mark A Pereira; Matthew P Buman Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2022-03-25 Impact factor: 5.492