PURPOSE: To (1) compare the effects of two worksite-based walking interventions on employee participation rates; (2) compare average daily step counts between conditions, and; (3) examine the effects of increases in average daily step counts on biometric and psychologic outcomes. DESIGN: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in which six employer groups were randomly selected and randomly assigned to condition. SETTING: Four manufacturing worksites and two office-based worksite served as the setting. SUBJECTS: A total of 474 employees from six employer groups were included. INTERVENTION: A standard walking program was compared to an enhanced program that included incentives, feedback, competitive challenges, and monthly wellness workshops. MEASURES: Walking was measured by self-reported daily step counts. Survey measures and biometric screenings were administered at baseline and 3, 6, and 9 months after baseline. ANALYSIS: Analysis used linear mixed models with repeated measures. RESULTS: During 9 months, participants in the enhanced condition averaged 726 more steps per day compared with those in the standard condition (p < .001). A 1000-step increase in average daily steps was associated with significant weight loss for both men (-3.8 lbs.) and women (-2.1 lbs.), and reductions in body mass index (-0.41 men, -0.31 women). Higher step counts were also associated with improvements in mood, having more energy, and higher ratings of overall health. CONCLUSIONS: An enhanced walking program significantly increases participation rates and daily step counts, which were associated with weight loss and reductions in body mass index.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To (1) compare the effects of two worksite-based walking interventions on employee participation rates; (2) compare average daily step counts between conditions, and; (3) examine the effects of increases in average daily step counts on biometric and psychologic outcomes. DESIGN: We conducted a cluster-randomized trial in which six employer groups were randomly selected and randomly assigned to condition. SETTING: Four manufacturing worksites and two office-based worksite served as the setting. SUBJECTS: A total of 474 employees from six employer groups were included. INTERVENTION: A standard walking program was compared to an enhanced program that included incentives, feedback, competitive challenges, and monthly wellness workshops. MEASURES: Walking was measured by self-reported daily step counts. Survey measures and biometric screenings were administered at baseline and 3, 6, and 9 months after baseline. ANALYSIS: Analysis used linear mixed models with repeated measures. RESULTS: During 9 months, participants in the enhanced condition averaged 726 more steps per day compared with those in the standard condition (p < .001). A 1000-step increase in average daily steps was associated with significant weight loss for both men (-3.8 lbs.) and women (-2.1 lbs.), and reductions in body mass index (-0.41 men, -0.31 women). Higher step counts were also associated with improvements in mood, having more energy, and higher ratings of overall health. CONCLUSIONS: An enhanced walking program significantly increases participation rates and daily step counts, which were associated with weight loss and reductions in body mass index.
Entities:
Keywords:
body mass index; comparative effectiveness research; exercise; prevention research; walking; workplace
Authors: Jingxia Kong; Ying Chen; Yingjing Zheng; Lin Zhu; Boyan Chen; Xiao Cheng; Mengna Song; Donald L Patrick; Shirley A A Beresford; Hongmei Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Luke Wolfenden; Sharni Goldman; Fiona G Stacey; Alice Grady; Melanie Kingsland; Christopher M Williams; John Wiggers; Andrew Milat; Chris Rissel; Adrian Bauman; Margaret M Farrell; France Légaré; Ali Ben Charif; Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun; Rebecca K Hodder; Jannah Jones; Debbie Booth; Benjamin Parmenter; Tim Regan; Sze Lin Yoong Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-11-14
Authors: Emma Pearson; Harry Prapavessis; Christopher Higgins; Robert Petrella; Lauren White; Marc Mitchell Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 6.457