Ergonomics training coupled with new Sit-Stand workstation implementation influences usage

Traditional versus dynamic sitting: Lumbar spine kinematics and pain during computer work and activity guided tasks

Dynamic sitting may mitigate low back pain during prolonged seated work. The current study compared pelvis and lumbar spine kinematics, pain, and work productivity, in traditional and dynamic sitting. Sixteen participants completed three 20-min blocks of computer work and activity guided tasks in a traditional office chair or backless and multiaxial rotating seat pan while kinematics were measured from accelerometers on the low back. Pain ratings were recorded on a visual analogue scale every 10 min. Similar pelvis and lumbar kinematics emerged when performing computer work in traditional and dynamic sitting. Pelvis and lumbar sagittal and frontal plane shifts and fidgets were largest for dynamic sitting in the activity guided tasks. Buttocks pain was higher in dynamic sitting, but low back pain and work productivity were unaffected. Dynamic sitting increased spine movement during activity guided tasks, without negatively impacting lumbar kinematics, low back pain, or productivity during seated computer work.

Evaluation of the effect of corrective exercise intervention on musculoskeletal disorders, fatigue and working memory of office workers

Objectives: The present study aimed to investigate the effect of corrective exercise intervention (corrective exercise reminding and training software) on musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), fatigue, posture and working memory among office workers. Methods: A total of 66 office workers participated in the present study. Data collection was carried out using questionnaires (including the Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire, multidimensional fatigue inventory and Borg rating scale), direct observations of work postures using rapid upper limb assessment (RULA) and rapid office strain assessment, and the n-back test. Results: There was a significant difference between the two groups (intervention and control) in terms of the severity of musculoskeletal discomfort after the intervention. There was a significant decrease in the mean score of trunk posture and the total RULA score in the intervention group after the intervention. The severity of perceived discomfort in all areas except the knee declined during the intervention. There was also a significant difference in physical and mental fatigue scores before and after the intervention. There was a significant difference in the accuracy score of office workers after the intervention compared to before the intervention. Conclusions: Overall, the results confirm the effectiveness of this low-cost, simple and easy-to-use ergonomic intervention.

Effectiveness of workplace interventions with digital elements to reduce sedentary behaviours in office employees: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Digital interventions are potential tools for reducing and limiting occupational sedentary behaviour (SB) in sedentary desk-based jobs. Given the harmful effects of sitting too much and sitting for too long while working, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effectiveness of workplace interventions, that incorporated digital elements, to reduce the time spent in SB in office workers.

METHODS

Randomised control trials that evaluated the implementation of workplace interventions that incorporated digital elements for breaking and limiting SB among desk-based jobs were identified by literature searches in six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PEDro) published up to 2023. Studies were included if total and/or occupational SB were assessed. Only studies that reported pre- and postintervention mean differences and standard deviations or standard errors for both intervention arms were used for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields QUALSYST tool.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. The most employed digital elements were information delivery and mediated organisational support and social influences. Multicomponent, information, and counselling interventions measuring total and/or occupational/nonoccupational SB time by self-report or via device-based measures were reported. Multicomponent interventions were the most represented. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, which presented a reduction of 29.9 (95% CI: -45.2, -14.5) min/8 h workday in SB (overall effect: Z = 3.81).

CONCLUSIONS

Multicomponent interventions, using a wide range of digital features, have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing time spent in SB at the workplace among desk-based employees. However, due to hybrid work (i.e., work in the office and home) being a customary mode of work for many employees, it is important for future studies to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions in the evolving work landscape.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review protocol was registered in the Prospero database (CRD42022377366).

Mechanical work and energy of sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions performed with traditional and dynamic office chair designs

BACKGROUND

Adherence to sit-stand workstation usage has been shown to decrease post-intervention, with the reported reasons related to fatigue, cumbersome workstation adjustments, and focus.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the mechanical work and total energy required to perform transitions from a traditional office chair and a dynamic chair designed specifically for sit-stand workstations. The whole-body, thigh, and shank centre-of-mass (CoM) were evaluated.

METHODS

Fifteen participants (8 male; 7 female) performed three intermittent sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions from the traditional and dynamic chairs. Kinematic data of the trunk, pelvis, and lower extremities were collected using an optoelectronic motion capture system and triaxial accelerometers. The change in total energy and work between the sitting and standing postures were evaluated for each CoM point. Lumbar spine range-of-motion was further assessed between chair conditions.

RESULTS

Chair designs facilitated opposite work and energy responses for a given transition. Transitions performed from the dynamic chair reduced the work and total energy of the whole-body CoM, by ±8.5J and ±214.6J (p < 0.001), respectively. The work and energy of the thigh CoM differed within transitions (p < 0.001), but the positive and negative components were similar between chairs (work =±0.18J, energy =±0.55J). The dynamic chair increased the total energy (±38.3J, p < 0.001) but not the work of the shank CoM (±1.1J, p≥0.347).

CONCLUSION

The required mechanical work and energy of sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions was modified by chair design. These outcomes have the potential to address identified reasons for the disuse of sit-stand workstations.