Literature DB >> 32722696

The user and non-user perspective: Experiences of office workers with long-term access to sit-stand workstations.

Lidewij R Renaud1, Erwin M Speklé1,2, Allard J van der Beek1, Hidde P van der Ploeg1, H Roeline Pasman1, Maaike A Huysmans1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Sit-stand workstations have been shown to be effective in reducing sitting time in office workers. The aim of this study was to explore reasons for use and non-use of sit-stand workstations and strategies to decrease sitting and increase physical activity in the workplace from perspectives of users and non-users, as well as from managers and ergo-coaches.
METHODS: Six group interviews with employees who have had access to sit-stand workstations for several years were conducted in a large semi-governmental organisation in the Netherlands. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis. Open coding was conducted by three researchers and codes and themes were discussed within the research team.
RESULTS: Thematic analysis resulted in two major themes: 1) Reasons for use and non-use and 2) Strategies to increase standing and physical activity in the workplace. Shared and distinct reasons for use and non-use were identified between users and non-users of the sit-stand workstations. The most important reasons for use indicated by users were that they had experiencing immediate benefits, including staying alert and increasing focus; these benefits were not acknowledged by non-users. Non-users indicated that sitting was comfortable for them and that they were therefore not motivated to use the standing option. Strategies to increase the use of the standing option included an introductory phase to become familiar with working while standing and to experience the immediate benefits that come from using the standing option. Furthermore, providing reminders to use the standing option was suggested as a strategy to increase and sustain the use of sit-stand workstations. Increased use may lead to a change in the sitting culture within the organisation, as more employees would adopt active movement behaviours.
CONCLUSION: Immediate benefits of the use of the standing option-only mentioned by the users-was the most distinct reason to use sit-stand workstations. Future research should explore how to motivate potential users to adhere to an introductory phase in order to experience these immediate benefits, whether it is linked to the use of sit-stand workstations or other interventions to reduce sitting time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32722696      PMCID: PMC7386596          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  48 in total

Review 1.  Evidence of health risks associated with prolonged standing at work and intervention effectiveness.

Authors:  Thomas R Waters; Robert B Dick
Journal:  Rehabil Nurs       Date:  2014-07-07       Impact factor: 1.625

2.  Workplace health beliefs concerning physical activity and sedentary behaviour.

Authors:  B Sudholz; J Salmon; A J Mussap
Journal:  Occup Med (Lond)       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 1.611

Review 3.  The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions.

Authors:  Susan Michie; Maartje M van Stralen; Robert West
Journal:  Implement Sci       Date:  2011-04-23       Impact factor: 7.327

Review 4.  Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.

Authors:  Nipun Shrestha; Katriina T Kukkonen-Harjula; Jos H Verbeek; Sharea Ijaz; Veerle Hermans; Zeljko Pedisic
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-06-20

Review 5.  The Impact of Active Workstations on Workplace Productivity and Performance: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Samson O Ojo; Daniel P Bailey; Angel M Chater; David J Hewson
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 3.390

6.  Common Perceived Barriers and Facilitators for Reducing Sedentary Behaviour among Office Workers.

Authors:  Carla F J Nooijen; Lena V Kallings; Victoria Blom; Örjan Ekblom; Yvonne Forsell; Maria M Ekblom
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 3.390

7.  Current and ceased users of sit stand workstations: a qualitative evaluation of ergonomics, safety and health factors within a workplace setting.

Authors:  Brendan Henderson; Rwth Stuckey; Tessa Keegel
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  What strategies do desk-based workers choose to reduce sitting time and how well do they work? Findings from a cluster randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Samantha K Stephens; Elizabeth G Eakin; Bronwyn K Clark; Elisabeth A H Winkler; Neville Owen; Anthony D LaMontagne; Marj Moodie; Sheleigh P Lawler; David W Dunstan; Genevieve N Healy
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2018-10-12       Impact factor: 6.457

Review 9.  Perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of reducing occupational sitting: review and thematic synthesis.

Authors:  Nyssa T Hadgraft; Charlotte L Brakenridge; David W Dunstan; Neville Owen; Genevieve N Healy; Sheleigh P Lawler
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2018-09-18       Impact factor: 6.457

10.  Sit-Stand Desk Software Can Now Monitor and Prompt Office Workers to Change Health Behaviors.

Authors:  Pankaj Parag Sharma; Ranjana K Mehta; Adam Pickens; Gang Han; Mark Benden
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2018-10-08       Impact factor: 2.888

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.