Pieter Coenen1,2, Genevieve N Healy1,3,4, Elisabeth A H Winkler3, David W Dunstan3,4,5,6,7,8,9, Neville Owen3,4,10, Marj Moodie11, Anthony D LaMontagne12,10, Elizabeth A Eakin3, Leon M Straker13. 1. School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. 2. Department of Public and Occupational Health, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 3. School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. 4. Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia. 5. School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 6. School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 7. Department of Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 8. School of Sport Science, Exercise and Health, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 9. Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne, Australia. 10. Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 11. Deakin Health Economics, Centre for Population Health Research, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 12. Centre for Population Health Research, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia. 13. School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. L.Straker@curtin.edu.au.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Initiatives to reduce office-workplace sitting are proliferating, but the impact of pre-existing musculoskeletal symptoms on their effectiveness has not been determined. We assessed the influence of musculoskeletal symptoms on the outcomes of a workplace sitting intervention. METHODS: Baseline and 3-month data from a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a workplace sitting intervention (Stand Up Victoria; trial registration number ACTRN12611000742976) were used. Office workers (n = 231) from 14 work teams within one organisation were randomised (by worksite) to a multicomponent program with individual-, organisational-, and environmental-level (sit-stand workstations) change strategies; or, to a control condition (no intervention). Musculoskeletal symptoms in the low-back, upper and lower extremities (present/absent) were assessed through self-report. Linear regression models tested the moderation by baseline musculoskeletal symptoms of intervention effects on workplace sitting and standing time and on sitting and standing bout durations, assessed by the activPAL3™ activity monitor. RESULTS: There were significant reductions in sitting and increased standing at work (p < 0.05). However, effects varied significantly by the presence of pre-existing low-back (but not other) symptoms, with greater benefit being seen in those without symptoms. Effects on sitting time and sitting bout duration were weaker in those with low-back symptoms compared to those without by 34.6 [95% CI (0.9; 68.3)] min/8-h workday and 5.1 [95% CI (0.2; 9.9)] min, respectively. Comparable effects were seen for standing. CONCLUSION: Low-back symptoms may impact on the extent to which office workers change their workplace sitting and standing time. A prudent next step to improve the effectiveness of workplace sitting-reduction initiatives such as Stand Up Victoria may be to assess and address the needs of those who displayed comparatively limited behaviour change, namely those with pre-existing low-back discomfort.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: Initiatives to reduce office-workplace sitting are proliferating, but the impact of pre-existing musculoskeletal symptoms on their effectiveness has not been determined. We assessed the influence of musculoskeletal symptoms on the outcomes of a workplace sitting intervention. METHODS: Baseline and 3-month data from a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a workplace sitting intervention (Stand Up Victoria; trial registration number ACTRN12611000742976) were used. Office workers (n = 231) from 14 work teams within one organisation were randomised (by worksite) to a multicomponent program with individual-, organisational-, and environmental-level (sit-stand workstations) change strategies; or, to a control condition (no intervention). Musculoskeletal symptoms in the low-back, upper and lower extremities (present/absent) were assessed through self-report. Linear regression models tested the moderation by baseline musculoskeletal symptoms of intervention effects on workplace sitting and standing time and on sitting and standing bout durations, assessed by the activPAL3™ activity monitor. RESULTS: There were significant reductions in sitting and increased standing at work (p < 0.05). However, effects varied significantly by the presence of pre-existing low-back (but not other) symptoms, with greater benefit being seen in those without symptoms. Effects on sitting time and sitting bout duration were weaker in those with low-back symptoms compared to those without by 34.6 [95% CI (0.9; 68.3)] min/8-h workday and 5.1 [95% CI (0.2; 9.9)] min, respectively. Comparable effects were seen for standing. CONCLUSION:Low-back symptoms may impact on the extent to which office workers change their workplace sitting and standing time. A prudent next step to improve the effectiveness of workplace sitting-reduction initiatives such as Stand Up Victoria may be to assess and address the needs of those who displayed comparatively limited behaviour change, namely those with pre-existing low-back discomfort.
Authors: Genevieve N Healy; Elizabeth G Eakin; Neville Owen; Anthony D Lamontagne; Marj Moodie; Elisabeth A H Winkler; Brianna S Fjeldsoe; Glen Wiesner; Lisa Willenberg; David W Dunstan Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Francis Q S Dzakpasu; Alison Carver; Christian J Brakenridge; Flavia Cicuttini; Donna M Urquhart; Neville Owen; David W Dunstan Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2021-12-13 Impact factor: 6.457