The effect of standing desks on manual control in children and young adults

Effect of a 16-week multi-level classroom standing desk intervention on cognitive performance and academic achievement in adolescents

The replacement of traditional classroom desks for active-permissive desks has been tested to reduce sitting time during classes. However, their impact on other domains is still unclear. We aimed to verify the potential effects of a classroom standing desk intervention on cognitive function and academic achievement in 6th-grade students. This was a controlled trial conducted with two classes [intervention (n = 22) and control (n = 27)] from a public school in Lisbon, Portugal. The intervention was carried out for 16 weeks and consisted of multi-level actions (students, parents, and teachers) centered on the implementation of standing desks in the intervention classroom. The control group had traditional classes with no use of standing desks or any other interference/action from the research team. Pre- and post-assessments of executive functions (attention, inhibitory function, memory, and fluid intelligence) and academic achievement were obtained. No differences between groups were found at baseline. Both groups improved (time effect) academic achievement (p < 0.001), memory span (p < 0.001), and inhibitory function (p = 0.008). Group versus time interactions were observed regarding operational memory (intervention: + 18.0% and control: + 41.6%; p = 0.039) and non-verbal fluid intelligence (intervention: − 14.0% and control: + 3.9%; p = 0.017). We concluded that a 16-week classroom standing desk intervention did not improve cognitive performance or academic achievement more than the traditional sitting classes.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT03137836) (date of first registration: 03/05/2017).

The effect of using a cycling workstation on mouse dexterity

This study investigated the effect of using a cycling workstation on mouse dexterity, including if and how this changed with practice. Thirty-four healthy adults were allocated to a sitting group (n = 17) or cycling group (n = 17). All participants completed standardised computer tasks on 6 occasions: baseline and final—all participants were seated; practice 1 to 4—sitting group participants were seated, cycling group participants pedalled on an under desk cycle. Three computer tasks were employed: (1) Tracking (continuous task)—participants used the mouse pointer to track a dot in a figure of 8 pattern at 3 different speeds without a guide then with a guide (2) Aiming (discrete task)—participants moved the mouse pointer to a dot which repeatedly disappeared then reappeared again in different locations, creating the outline of a pentagram (3) Steering (continuous task)—participants steered the mouse pointer around two different pathways. Accuracy was measured during the Tracking and Steering tasks as the root mean square error and penalised path accuracy respectively. Speed was measured during the Aiming task as the movement time. Data was analysed using frequentist and Bayes Factor analyses. During the continuous tasks (Tracking and Steering), accuracy was impaired among participants using the cycling workstation, both compared to their accuracy when seated and to the accuracy of participants in the sitting group. In contrast, no deficits in speed were noted among participants using the cycling work station during the discrete task (Aiming). No learning effects were observed among either group for any tasks. These findings suggest using a cycling workstation may impair the accuracy but not speed of mouse use, regardless of task practice. Overall this supports the implementation of cycling workstations in typical office settings, but suggests cycling workstations may impair productivity among workers performing high precision mouse tasks.

The effect of sit-stand desks on office worker behavioral and health outcomes: A scoping review

This scoping review examines the effects of sit-stand desks (SSDs) on six domains: behavior (e.g. time sitting and standing), physiological, work performance, psychological, discomfort, and posture. Fifty-three articles met criteria. We determined the percentage of significant results for each domain. Forty-seven studies were experimental trials. Sample sizes ranged from six to 231 participants. Follow-up time-frames ranged from one day to one year. Sixty-one percent of behavioral (24 studies), 37% of physiological (28 studies), 7% of work performance (23 studies), 31% of psychological (11 studies), 43% of discomfort (22 studies), and 18% of posture domain results (4 studies) were significant. We conclude that SSDs effectively change behaviors, but these changes only mildly effect health outcomes. SSDs seem most effective for discomfort and least for productivity. Further study is needed to examine long-term effects, and to determine clinically appropriate dosage and workstation setup.