A three arm cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life intervention for reducing daily sitting time in office workers: study protocol

Associations between domains of sedentary behavior, well-being, and quality of life - a cross-sectional study

The importance of reducing sedentary behavior (SB) in the prevention of mortality and chronic and mental diseases is scientifically well grounded, but SB can be accumulated in diverse domains of life, such as leisure-time SB, transport between home/work/school when sitting (transport-related SB), or in occupational settings such as working or studying (occupational SB), and the associations for each domain of SB with well-being measures and quality of life are still underexplored from a positive perspective. Through a cross-sectional investigation, we collected data from 584 participants who completed a questionnaire throughout November 2021 and with Spearman correlation test, analysed the associations between SB in three different domains with psychological well-being, satisfaction with life, and quality of life. Our results indicated that after adjustment for physical activity, sex, body mass index, smoking history, chronic disease status, financial perception, quality/duration of sleep and university group, in younger adults (18 to 24 years old), leisure-time SB was negatively related to psychological well-being (rho = -0.255; p = 0.008), and in adults (25 to 64 years old), occupational SB was negatively related to satisfaction with life (rho = -0.257; p < .001) and the mental component of quality of life (rho = -0.163; p = 0.027). Our findings highlight the idea that not all SB is built the same and that future strategies to reduce SB from people's lives must target specific domains of SB according to the age group when aiming to improve well-being and quality of life.

The Regulate your Sitting Time (RESIT) intervention for reducing sitting time in individuals with type 2 diabetes: findings from a randomised-controlled feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Reducing and breaking up sitting is recommended for optimal management of Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Yet, there is limited evidence of interventions targeting these outcomes in individuals with this condition. The primary aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of delivering and evaluating a tailored online intervention to reduce and break up sitting in adults with T2DM.

METHODS

A mixed-methods two-arm randomised controlled feasibility trial was conducted in ambulatory adults with T2DM who were randomised 1:1 to the REgulate your SItting Time (RESIT) intervention or usual care control group. The intervention included online education, self-monitoring and prompt tools (wearable devices, smartphone apps, computer apps) and health coaching. Feasibility outcomes were recruitment, attrition, data completion rates and intervention acceptability. Measurements of device-assessed sitting (intended primary outcome for definitive trial), standing and stepping, and physical function, psychosocial health and wellbeing were taken at baseline, 3 months and 6 months. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted at six-months (post intervention) to explore acceptability, feasibility and experiences of the trial and intervention using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Seventy participants aged 55 ± 11 years were recruited. Recruitment rate (proportion of eligible participants enrolled into the study) was 67% and participant retention rate at 6 months was 93% (n = 5 withdrawals). Data completion rates for daily sitting were 100% at baseline and ranged from 83 to 91% at 3 months and 6 months. Descriptive analysis demonstrated potential for the intervention to reduce device-measured sitting, which was 30.9 ± 87.2 and 22.2 ± 82.5 min/day lower in the intervention group at 3 and 6 months, respectively, compared with baseline. In the control group, sitting was 4.4 ± 99.5 and 23.7 ± 85.2 min/day lower at 3 and 6 months, respectively. Qualitative analysis identified three themes: reasons for participating in the trial, acceptability of study procedures, and the delivery and experience of taking part in the RESIT intervention. Overall, the measurement visits and intervention were acceptable to participants.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the RESIT intervention and evaluation methods, supporting a future definitive trial. If RESIT is found to be clinically effective, this could lead to changes in diabetes healthcare with a focus on reducing sitting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN14832389).

Implementation and engagement of the SMART Work & Life sitting reduction intervention: an exploratory analysis on intervention effectiveness

BACKGROUND

To enhance the impact of interventions, it is important to understand how intervention engagement relates to study outcomes. We report on the level of implementation and engagement with the SMART Work & Life (SWAL) programme (delivered with (SWAL plus desk) and without a height-adjustable desk (SWAL)) and explore the effects of different levels of this on change in daily sitting time in comparison to the control group.

METHODS

The extent of intervention delivery by workplace champions and the extent of engagement by champions and participants (staff) with each intervention activity was assessed by training attendance logs, workplace champion withdrawal dates, intervention activities logs and questionnaires. These data were used to assess whether a cluster met defined criteria for low, medium, or high implementation and engagement or none of these. Mixed effects linear regression analyses tested whether change in sitting time varied by: (i) the number of intervention activities implemented and engaged with, and (ii) the percentage of implementation and engagement with all intervention strategies.

RESULTS

Workplace champions were recruited for all clusters, with 51/52 (98%) attending training. Overall, 12/27 (44.4%) SWAL and 9/25 (36.0%) SWAL plus desk clusters implemented all main intervention strategies. Across remaining clusters, the level of intervention implementation varied. Those in the SWAL (n = 8 (29.6%) clusters, 80 (32.1%) participants) and SWAL plus desk (n = 5 (20.0%) clusters, 41 (17.1%) participants) intervention groups who implemented and engaged with the most intervention strategies and had the highest percentage of cluster implementation and engagement with all intervention strategies sat for 30.9 (95% CI -53.9 to -7.9, p = 0.01) and 75.6 (95% CI -103.6 to -47.7, p < 0.001) fewer minutes/day respectively compared to the control group at 12 month follow up. These differences were larger than the complete case analysis. The differences in sitting time observed for the medium and low levels were similar to the complete case analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Most intervention strategies were delivered to some extent across the clusters although there was large variation. Superior effects for sitting reduction were seen for those intervention groups who implemented and engaged with the most intervention components and had the highest level of cluster implementation and engagement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN11618007. Registered on 24 January 2018. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTNISRCTN11618007 .

Participant and workplace champion experiences of an intervention designed to reduce sitting time in desk-based workers: SMART work & life

BACKGROUND

A cluster randomised controlled trial demonstrated the effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life (SWAL) behaviour change intervention, with and without a height-adjustable desk, for reducing sitting time in desk-based workers. Staff within organisations volunteered to be trained to facilitate delivery of the SWAL intervention and act as workplace champions. This paper presents the experiences of these champions on the training and intervention delivery, and from participants on their intervention participation.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative feedback from workplace champions on their training session was collected. Participants provided quantitative feedback via questionnaires at 3 and 12 month follow-up on the intervention strategies (education, group catch ups, sitting less challenges, self-monitoring and prompts, and the height-adjustable desk [SWAL plus desk group only]). Interviews and focus groups were also conducted at 12 month follow-up with workplace champions and participants respectively to gather more detailed feedback. Transcripts were uploaded to NVivo and the constant comparative approach informed the analysis of the interviews and focus groups.

RESULTS

Workplace champions rated the training highly with mean scores ranging from 5.3/6 to 5.7/6 for the eight parts. Most participants felt the education increased their awareness of the health consequences of high levels of sitting (SWAL: 90.7%; SWAL plus desk: 88.2%) and motivated them to change their sitting time (SWAL: 77.5%; SWAL plus desk: 85.77%). A high percentage of participants (70%) reported finding the group catch up session helpful and worthwhile. However, focus groups highlighted mixed responses to the group catch-up sessions, sitting less challenges and self-monitoring intervention components. Participants in the SWAL plus desk group felt that having a height-adjustable desk was key in changing their behaviour, with intrinsic as well as time based factors reported as key influences on the height-adjustable desk usage. In both intervention groups, participants reported a range of benefits from the intervention including more energy, less fatigue, an increase in focus, alertness, productivity and concentration as well as less musculoskeletal problems (SWAL plus desk group only). Work-related, interpersonal, personal attributes, physical office environment and physical barriers were identified as barriers when trying to sit less and move more.

CONCLUSIONS

Workplace champion and participant feedback on the intervention was largely positive but it is clear that different behaviour change strategies worked for different people indicating that a 'one size fits all' approach may not be appropriate for this type of intervention. The SWAL intervention could be tested in a broader range of organisations following a few minor adaptations based on the champion and participant feedback.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISCRCTN registry (ISRCTN11618007).

A multicomponent intervention to reduce daily sitting time in office workers: the SMART Work & Life three-arm cluster RCT

Background

Office workers spend 70-85% of their time at work sitting. High levels of sitting have been linked to poor physiological and psychological health. Evidence shows the need for fully powered randomised controlled trials, with long-term follow-up, to test the effectiveness of interventions to reduce sitting time.

Objective

Our objective was to test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life intervention, delivered with and without a height-adjustable workstation, compared with usual practice at 12-month follow-up.

Design

A three-arm cluster randomised controlled trial.

Setting

Councils in England.

Participants

Office workers.

Intervention

SMART Work & Life is a multicomponent intervention that includes behaviour change strategies, delivered by workplace champions. Clusters were randomised to (1) the SMART Work & Life intervention, (2) the SMART Work & Life intervention with a height-adjustable workstation (i.e. SMART Work & Life plus desk) or (3) a control group (i.e. usual practice). Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and at 3 and 12 months.

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome was device-assessed daily sitting time compared with usual practice at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included sitting, standing, stepping time, physical activity, adiposity, blood pressure, biochemical measures, musculoskeletal issues, psychosocial variables, work-related health, diet and sleep. Cost-effectiveness and process evaluation data were collected.

Results

A total of 78 clusters (756 participants) were randomised [control, 26 clusters (n = 267); SMART Work & Life only, 27 clusters (n = 249); SMART Work & Life plus desk, 25 clusters (n = 240)]. At 12 months, significant differences between groups were found in daily sitting time, with participants in the SMART Work & Life-only and SMART Work & Life plus desk arms sitting 22.2 minutes per day (97.5% confidence interval -38.8 to -5.7 minutes/day; p = 0.003) and 63.7 minutes per day (97.5% confidence interval -80.0 to -47.4 minutes/day; p < 0.001), respectively, less than the control group. Participants in the SMART Work & Life plus desk arm sat 41.7 minutes per day (95% confidence interval -56.3 to -27.0 minutes/day; p < 0.001) less than participants in the SMART Work & Life-only arm. Sitting time was largely replaced by standing time, and changes in daily behaviour were driven by changes during work hours on workdays. Behaviour changes observed at 12 months were similar to 3 months. At 12 months, small improvements were seen for stress, well-being and vigour in both intervention groups, and for pain in the lower extremity and social norms in the SMART Work & Life plus desk group. Results from the process evaluation supported these findings, with participants reporting feeling more energised, alert, focused and productive. The process evaluation also showed that participants viewed the intervention positively; however, the extent of engagement varied across clusters. The average cost of SMART Work & Life only and SMART Work & Life plus desk was £80.59 and £228.31 per participant, respectively. Within trial, SMART Work & Life only had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £12,091 per quality-adjusted life-year, with SMART Work & Life plus desk being dominated. Over a lifetime, SMART Work & Life only and SMART Work & Life plus desk had incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £4985 and £13,378 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively.

Limitations

The study was carried out in one sector, limiting generalisability.

Conclusions

The SMART Work & Life intervention, provided with and without a height-adjustable workstation, was successful in changing sitting time.

Future work

There is a need for longer-term follow-up, as well as follow-up within different organisations.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN11618007.

The effect of the leisure activities based on chess and cards for improving cognition of older adults: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

With the increase in age, the probability of cognitive impairment in the older people is increasing. More and more evidence shows that participating in leisure activities, especially chess and cards, is beneficial to the cognition and mental state of the older people. But the evidence for causal inference is limited. There is a need to conduct a fully powered randomized controlled trial (RCT) and long-term follow-up to test the effectiveness of intervention measures in improving cognitive function and mental state. This paper describes the methodology of a cluster RCT designed to determine the effect of chess and cards leisure activities on the cognitive function of the older people over 60 years old.

METHODS/DESIGN

A cluster RCT consisting of 8 clusters will be conducted in four regions of Ningxia, China (Helan, Litong, Qingtongxia, and Shapotou). Clusters will be randomly assigned to the advocacy intervention group, which is also delivered with free leisure activities tools (chess and cards), or the control group. A baseline survey will be conducted before the intervention. A mid-term and final survey will be carried out twelve and twenty-four months after the intervention, respectively. The primary outcome is a change in cognitive function, and the secondary outcomes are changes in anxiety, depression, and loneliness.

DISCUSSION

The results of this RCT will be helpful to (1) confirm the effectiveness of chess and cards leisure activities in improving the cognitive function of the older people over 60 years old; (2) determine the relationship between the frequency and duration of chess and cards leisure activities and cognitive function; (3) provide evidence of promoting participation in leisure activities through education campaigns and free provision of chess and cards tools; and (4) provide valuable information for successful aging.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200066817. Registered on 19 December 2022.

Providing office workers with height-adjustable workstation to reduce and interrupt workplace sitting time: protocol for the Stand Up for Healthy Aging (SUFHA) cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Sedentary behavior (SB) has been linked to several negative health outcomes. Therefore, reducing SB or breaking up prolonged periods of SB improves functional fitness, food consumption, job satisfaction, and productivity. Reducing SB can be achieved by introducing a health-enhancing contextual modification promoted by a sit-stand desk in the workplace. The primary goal will be to test the effectiveness of this intervention in reducing and breaking up SB, while improving health outcomes in office-based workers during a 6-month intervention.

METHODS

A two-arm (1:1), superiority parallel-group cluster RCT will be conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention in a sample of office-based workers from a university in Portugal. The intervention will consist of a psychoeducation session, motivational prompts, and contextual modification promoted by a sit-stand desk in the workplace for 6 months. The control group will work as usual in their workplace, with no contextual change or prompts during the 6-month intervention. Three assessment points will be conducted in both groups, pre-intervention (baseline), post-intervention, and a 3-month follow-up. The primary outcomes include sedentary and physical activity-related variables, which will be objectively assessed with 24 h monitoring using the ActivPAL for 7 days. The secondary outcomes include (a) biometric indices as body composition, body mass index, waist circumference, and postural inequalities; and (b) psychosocial variables such as overall and work-related fatigue, overall discomfort, life/work satisfaction, quality of life, and eating behavior. Both the primary and secondary outcomes will be assessed at each assessment point.

DISCUSSION

This study will lean on the use of a sit-stand workstation for 6 months, prompted by an initial psychoeducational session and ongoing motivational prompts. We will aim to contribute to this topic by providing robust data on alternating sitting and standing postures in the workplace.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was prospectively registered, and the details are at: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JHGPW ; Registered 15 November 2022. OSF Preregistration.

The medium-term perceived impact of work from home on life and work domains of knowledge workers during COVID-19 pandemic: A survey at the National Research Council of Italy

Objective

The study aimed to investigate perceptions and determinants of the overall impact on life and work domains among a community of knowledge workers after 18 months of forced work from home due to the pandemic.

Methods

A cross-sectional study with a retrospective assessment was conducted early in 2022 at the National Research Council of Italy. Five single-item questions explored the perceived impact on life domain while a 7-item scale the impact on the work domain. Bivariate analyses and multivariate regressions were used to evaluate the associations between impacts and some key factors defined by 29 ad hoc closed questions.

Results

More than 95% of the 748 respondents reported a perceived change in at least one item of the life domain. For each of these items, although a large group of subjects has reported that working from home had no impact (from 27 to 55%), in the rest of the sample the positive evaluation (from 30 to 60%) clearly prevailed over the negative one. Overall, most of the subjects (64%) rated the impact on the work experience positively. Relationship with colleagues and participation in the work context were the items where the greatest number of negative rates was concentrated (27 and 25%, respectively). On the other hand, positive perceptions prevailed over both negative perceptions and lack of impact perceptions on the subjects of organizational flexibility and quality of work. The frequency of work-room sharing, home-work commute time and changes in sedentary lifestyle, have been identified as common explanatory factors of perceived impacts on both domains.

Conclusion

Overall, respondents reported positive rather than negative perceived impacts of forced work from home in both their lives and work. The obtained results suggest that policies to promote the physical and mental health of employees, strengthen inclusion and maintain a sense of community are necessary to improve workers' health and prevent the effects of perceived isolation on research activities.

The Cost-Effectiveness of the SMART Work & Life Intervention for Reducing Sitting Time

Sedentary behaviours continue to increase and are associated with heightened risks of morbidity and mortality. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of SMART Work & Life (SWAL), an intervention designed to reduce sitting time inside and outside of work, both with (SWAL-desk) and without (SWAL-only) a height-adjustable workstation compared to usual practice (control) for UK office workers. Health outcomes were assessed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs in pound sterling (2019-2020). Discounted costs and QALYs were estimated using regression methods with multiply imputed data from the SMART Work & Life trial. Absenteeism, productivity and wellbeing measures were also evaluated. The average cost of SWAL-desk was £228.31 and SWAL-only £80.59 per office worker. Within the trial, SWAL-only was more effective and costly compared to control (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER): £12,091 per QALY) while SWAL-desk was dominated (least effective and most costly). However, over a lifetime horizon, both SWAL-only and SWAL-desk were more effective and more costly than control. Comparing SWAL-only to control generated an ICER of £4985 per QALY. SWAL-desk was more effective and costly than SWAL-only, generating an ICER of £13,378 per QALY. Findings were sensitive to various worker, intervention, and extrapolation-related factors. Based on a lifetime horizon, SWAL interventions appear cost-effective for office-workers conditional on worker characteristics, intervention cost and longer-term maintenance in sitting time reductions.

A multicomponent structured health behaviour intervention to improve physical activity in long-distance HGV drivers: the SHIFT cluster RCT

Background

Long-distance heavy goods vehicle drivers are exposed to a multitude of risk factors associated with their occupation. The working environment of heavy goods vehicle drivers provides limited opportunities for a healthy lifestyle, and, consequently, heavy goods vehicle drivers exhibit higher than nationally representative rates of obesity and obesity-related comorbidities, and are underserved in terms of health promotion initiatives.

Objective

The aim of this trial was to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the multicomponent Structured Health Intervention For Truckers (SHIFT) programme, compared with usual care, at both 6 months and 16–18 months.

Design

A two-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, including a cost-effectiveness analysis and process evaluation.

Setting

Transport depots throughout the Midlands region of the UK.

Participants

Heavy goods vehicle drivers.

Intervention

The 6-month SHIFT programme included a group-based interactive 6-hour education session, health coach support and equipment provision [including a Fitbit® (Fitbit Inc., San Francisco, CA, US) and resistance bands/balls to facilitate a ‘cab workout’]. Clusters were randomised following baseline measurements to either the SHIFT arm or the control arm.

Main outcome measures

Outcome measures were assessed at baseline, with follow-up assessments occurring at both 6 months and 16–18 months. The primary outcome was device-measured physical activity, expressed as mean steps per day, at 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included device-measured sitting, standing, stepping, physical activity and sleep time (on any day, workdays and non-workdays), along with adiposity, biochemical measures, diet, blood pressure, psychophysiological reactivity, cognitive function, functional fitness, mental well-being, musculoskeletal symptoms and work-related psychosocial variables. Cost-effectiveness and process evaluation data were collected.

Results

A total of 382 participants (mean ± standard deviation age: 48.4 ± 9.4 years; mean ± standard deviation body mass index: 30.4 kg/m2 ± 5.1 kg/m2; 99% male) were recruited across 25 clusters. Participants were randomised (at the cluster level) to either the SHIFT arm (12 clusters, n = 183) or the control arm (13 clusters, n = 199). At 6 months, 209 (54.7%) participants provided primary outcome data. Significant differences in mean daily steps were found between arms, with participants in the SHIFT arm accumulating 1008 more steps per day than participants in the control arm (95% confidence interval 145 to 1871 steps; p = 0.022), which was largely driven by the maintenance of physical activity levels in the SHIFT arm and a decline in physical activity levels in the control arm. Favourable differences at 6 months were also seen in the SHIFT arm, relative to the control arm, in time spent sitting, standing and stepping, and time in moderate or vigorous activity. No differences between arms were observed at 16–18 months’ follow-up. No differences were observed between arms in the other secondary outcomes at either follow-up (i.e. 6 months and 16–18 months). The process evaluation demonstrated that the intervention was well received by participants and that the intervention reportedly had a positive impact on their health behaviours. The average total cost of delivering the SHIFT programme was £369.57 per driver, and resulting quality-adjusted life-years were similar across trial arms (SHIFT arm: 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 1.25; control arm: 1.25, 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 1.27).

Limitations

A higher (31.4%) than anticipated loss to follow-up was experienced at 6 months, with fewer (54.7%) participants providing valid primary outcome data at 6 months. The COVID-19 pandemic presents a major confounding factor, which limits our ability to draw firm conclusions regarding the sustainability of the SHIFT programme.

Conclusion

The SHIFT programme had a degree of success in positively impacting physical activity levels and reducing sitting time in heavy goods vehicle drivers at 6-months; however, these differences were not maintained at 16–18 months.

Future work

Further work involving stakeholder engagement is needed to refine the content of the programme, based on current findings, followed by the translation of the SHIFT programme into a scalable driver training resource.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN10483894.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 10, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Effectiveness of an intervention for reducing sitting time and improving health in office workers: three arm cluster randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention, with and without a height adjustable desk, on daily sitting time, and to investigate the relative effectiveness of the two interventions, and the effectiveness of both interventions on physical behaviours and physical, biochemical, psychological, and work related health and performance outcomes.

DESIGN

Cluster three arm randomised controlled trial with follow-up at three and 12 months.

SETTING

Local government councils in Leicester, Liverpool, and Greater Manchester, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

78 clusters including 756 desk based employees in defined offices, departments, or teams from two councils in Leicester, three in Greater Manchester, and one in Liverpool.

INTERVENTIONS

Clusters were randomised to one of three conditions: the SMART Work and Life (SWAL) intervention, the SWAL intervention with a height adjustable desk (SWAL plus desk), or control (usual practice).

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was daily sitting time, assessed by accelerometry, at 12 month follow-up. Secondary outcomes were accelerometer assessed sitting, prolonged sitting, standing and stepping time, and physical activity calculated over any valid day, work hours, workdays, and non-workdays, self-reported lifestyle behaviours, musculoskeletal problems, cardiometabolic health markers, work related health and performance, fatigue, and psychological measures.

RESULTS

Mean age of participants was 44.7 years, 72.4% (n=547) were women, and 74.9% (n=566) were white. Daily sitting time at 12 months was significantly lower in the intervention groups (SWAL -22.2 min/day, 95% confidence interval -38.8 to -5.7 min/day, P=0.003; SWAL plus desk -63.7 min/day, -80.1 to -47.4 min/day, P<0.001) compared with the control group. The SWAL plus desk intervention was found to be more effective than SWAL at changing sitting time (-41.7 min/day, -56.3 to -27.0 min/day, P<0.001). Favourable differences in sitting and prolonged sitting time at three and 12 month follow-ups for both intervention groups and for standing time for the SWAL plus desk group were observed during work hours and on workdays. Both intervention groups were associated with small improvements in stress, wellbeing, and vigour, and the SWAL plus desk group was associated with improvements in pain in the lower extremity, social norms for sitting and standing at work, and support.

CONCLUSIONS

Both SWAL and SWAL plus desk were associated with a reduction in sitting time, although the addition of a height adjustable desk was found to be threefold more effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN11618007.

Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of the Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire Among Office Employees

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Persian version of the sedentary behavior questionnaire (SBQ) among university office employees in Kermanshah province in the west of Iran.Method: A validation study was performed among 701 university office employees in Kermanshah province. The content validation process was conducted using interviews with content and lay experts. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated as test-retest reliability. In addition, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to assess the validity of the questionnaire structure.Results: The scale content validity indices using two general agreement approaches and the mean approach were 88.88 and 97.77%, respectively. The ICC was estimated at 1.00 [95% CI:0.99, 1.00]. The exploratory factor analyses suggested nine-factor solutions, and in the independent sample, the confirmatory factor analysis fit indices showed that the model had an acceptable fit to the data.Conclusion: The Persian version of the SBQ had acceptable reliability and validity for assessing SBs among office employees. This questionnaire is a simple and self-report tool for measuring SB in daily life and would be useful in the design and evaluation of preventive programs among administrative staff and high-risk population surveillance.

Device-assessed sleep and physical activity in individuals recovering from a hospital admission for COVID-19: a multicentre study

Background

The number of individuals recovering from severe COVID-19 is increasing rapidly. However, little is known about physical behaviours that make up the 24-h cycle within these individuals. This study aimed to describe physical behaviours following hospital admission for COVID-19 at eight months post-discharge including associations with acute illness severity and ongoing symptoms.

Methods

One thousand seventy-seven patients with COVID-19 discharged from hospital between March and November 2020 were recruited. Using a 14-day wear protocol, wrist-worn accelerometers were sent to participants after a five-month follow-up assessment. Acute illness severity was assessed by the WHO clinical progression scale, and the severity of ongoing symptoms was assessed using four previously reported data-driven clinical recovery clusters. Two existing control populations of office workers and individuals with type 2 diabetes were comparators.

Results

Valid accelerometer data from 253 women and 462 men were included. Women engaged in a mean ± SD of 14.9 ± 14.7 min/day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), with 12.1 ± 1.7 h/day spent inactive and 7.2 ± 1.1 h/day asleep. The values for men were 21.0 ± 22.3 and 12.6 ± 1.7 h /day and 6.9 ± 1.1 h/day, respectively. Over 60% of women and men did not have any days containing a 30-min bout of MVPA. Variability in sleep timing was approximately 2 h in men and women. More severe acute illness was associated with lower total activity and MVPA in recovery. The very severe recovery cluster was associated with fewer days/week containing continuous bouts of MVPA, longer total sleep time, and higher variability in sleep timing. Patients post-hospitalisation with COVID-19 had lower levels of physical activity, greater sleep variability, and lower sleep efficiency than a similarly aged cohort of office workers or those with type 2 diabetes.

Conclusions

Those recovering from a hospital admission for COVID-19 have low levels of physical activity and disrupted patterns of sleep several months after discharge. Our comparative cohorts indicate that the long-term impact of COVID-19 on physical behaviours is significant.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-022-01333-w.

Sitting less and moving more for improved metabolic and brain health in type 2 diabetes: 'OPTIMISE your health' trial protocol

Background

Clinical practice guidelines recommend that adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) sit less and move more throughout the day. The 18-month OPTIMISE Your Health Clinical Trial was developed to support desk-based workers with T2D achieve these recommendations. The two-arm protocol consists of an intervention and control arms. The intervention arm receives 6 months health coaching, a sit-stand desktop workstation and an activity tracker, followed by 6 months of text message support, then 6 months maintenance. The control arm receives a delayed modified intervention after 12 months of usual care. This paper describes the methods of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, compared to a delayed intervention control.

Methods

This is a two-arm RCT being conducted in Melbourne, Australia. Desk-based workers (≥0.8 full-time equivalent) aged 35–65 years, ambulatory, and with T2D and managed glycaemic control (6.5–10.0% HbA1c), are randomised to the multicomponent intervention (target n = 125) or delayed-intervention control (target n = 125) conditions. All intervention participants receive 6 months of tailored health coaching assisting them to “sit less” and “move more” at work and throughout the day, supported by a sit-stand desktop workstation and an activity tracker (Fitbit). Participants receive text message-based extended care for a further 6-months (6–12 months) followed by 6-months of non-contact (12–18 months: maintenance). Delayed intervention occurs at 12–18 months for the control arm. Assessments are undertaken at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 15 and 18-months. Primary outcomes are activPAL-measured sitting time (h/16 h day), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c; %, mmol/mol) and, cognitive function measures (visual learning and new memory; Paired Associates Learning Total Errors [adjusted]). Secondary, exploratory, and process outcomes will also be collected throughout the trial.

Discussion

The OPTIMISE Your Health trial will provide unique insights into the benefits of an intervention aimed at sitting less and moving more in desk-bound office workers with T2D, with outcomes relevant to glycaemic control, and to cardiometabolic and brain health. Findings will contribute new insights to add to the evidence base on initiating and maintaining behaviour change with clinical populations and inform practice in diabetes management.

Trial registration

ANZCTRN12618001159246.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-13123-x.

Factors impacting workplace investment in sit-stand workstations from the perspective of purchasing decision-makers

This explanatory sequential mixed-method study explored the factors associated with the investment (or not) in sit-stand workstations (SSWs) and alternative initiatives to reduce prolonged sitting at work from the perspective of furniture purchasing decision-makers in Australian workplaces. Participants (n = 270) from >200 organisations across 19 industry sectors completed an online survey. Seven interviews were conducted in a sub-sample of participants from organisations without SSWs. The majority (80%) of workplaces reported having invested in SSWs. Workplaces without SSWs, opposed to those with SSWs, were more likely to be private (79.6% vs. 43.5%), of small/medium size (70.4% vs. 35.6%) and without a wellness program (57.4% vs. 22.2%) (all p < 0.05). Financial implications were the main reason for not investing in SSWs. Exercise and stretch breaks were alternative initiatives to reducing sedentary behaviour at work. Better evidence on the return on investment is needed to support purchasing decisions on SSWs.

Effects of a Workplace Sit-Stand Desk Intervention on Health and Productivity

In Japan, standing while working has not yet become commonplace, and there is little evidence to support the benefits of standing during the workday. Therefore, this study assessed the relationship between the introduction of a sit–stand desk and its ability to reduce the negative effects of sitting too long and increase employees’ general health and productivity. Seventy-four Japanese desk workers participated in this three-month intervention study. Using a randomized controlled trial, the participants were divided into intervention (n = 36) and control (n = 38) groups. The participant characteristics were ascertained using a questionnaire. The intervention effectiveness was assessed by measuring health-, physical activity-, and work-related outcomes. The results indicate that the intervention group significantly decreased their sitting time at work (p = 0.002) and had reduced neck and shoulder pain (p = 0.001). There was a significant increase in subjective health (p = 0.002), vitality in work-related engagement (p < 0.001), and self-rated work performance over a four-week period (p = 0.017). These findings indicate a significant difference between the two groups, demonstrating the effectiveness of a sit–stand desk in reducing sedentary behavior and improving workers’ health and productivity. Future research can accumulate further evidence of best practice use of sit–stand desks.

Effects of Substituting Types of Physical Activity on Body Fat Mass and Work Efficiency among Workers

Low levels of physical activity (PA) not only increase healt h risks but also affect employee productivity. Although daily activity is interdependent with work productivity and personal health, few studies have examined how substituting physical activities would affect health and work efficiency. The present study aimed to investigate how substituting sedentary behaviors (SB) with increased PA and increasing the intensity of low-level activities during waking times affects the body fat mass and work efficiency of employees. Data were collected from 224 Japanese employees. SB, light physical activity (LPA), moderate physical activity (MPA), and vigorous physical activity (VPA) were measured using a tri-axial accelerometer, and body fat mass and work efficiency were also assessed. Analyses of the effects of substituting behaviors were based on the methods used in the isotemporal substitution model. Body fat mass decreased after substituting behaviors for 30 min per day: from SB to VPA (β = −4.800, 95% CI = −7.500; −2.100), from LPA to VPA (β = −4.680, 95% CI = −7.350; −1.980), and from MPA to VPA (β = −4.920, 95% CI = −7.680; −2.190). For work efficiency and physical activities, a higher work efficiency score was observed when substituting SB with LPA (β = 0.120, 95% CI = 0.030; 0.240), and a lower work efficiency score was observed when substituting LPA with VPA (β = −0.660, 95% CI = −1.350; −0.030). These results should help achieve greater results in promoting health and increasing work productivity by properly distributing and practicing daily physical activities during work hours.

A randomised-controlled feasibility study of the REgulate your SItting Time (RESIT) intervention for reducing sitting time in individuals with type 2 diabetes: study protocol

Background

People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) generally spend a large amount of time sitting. This increases their risk of cardiovascular disease, premature mortality, diabetes-related complications and mental health problems. There is a paucity of research that has evaluated interventions aimed at reducing and breaking up sitting in people with T2DM. The primary aim of this study is to assess the feasibility of delivering and evaluating a tailored intervention to reduce and break up sitting in ambulatory adults with T2DM.

Methods

This is a mixed-methods randomised controlled feasibility trial. Participants (n=70) with T2DM aged 18-85 years who sit ≥7 h/day and are able to ambulate independently will be randomly allocated to receive the REgulate your SItting Time (RESIT) intervention or usual care (control group) for 24 weeks. RESIT is a person-focused intervention that delivers a standardised set of behaviour change techniques to the participants, but the mode through which they are delivered can vary depending on the tools selected by each participant. The intervention includes an online education programme, health coach support, and a range of self-selected tools (smartphone apps, computer-prompt software, and wearable devices) that deliver behaviour change techniques such as self-monitoring of sitting and providing prompts to break up sitting. Measures will be taken at baseline, 12 and 24 weeks. Eligibility, recruitment, retention and data completion rates will be used to assess trial feasibility. Sitting, standing and stepping will be measured using a thigh-worn activity monitor. Cardiometabolic health, physical function, psychological well-being, sleep and musculoskeletal symptoms will also be assessed. A process evaluation will be conducted including evaluation of intervention acceptability and fidelity.

Discussion

This study will identify the feasibility of delivering a tailored intervention to reduce and break up sitting in ambulatory adults with T2DM and evaluating it through a randomised controlled trial (RCT) design. The findings will inform a fully powered RCT to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention.

Trial registration

ISRCTN, ISRCTN14832389; Registered 6 August 2020.

Adverse event recording failed to reflect potential harms: a review of trial protocols of behavioral, lifestyle and psychological therapy interventions

OBJECTIVE

To explore how potential harms are assessed in trials of behavioral, lifestyle and psychological therapy interventions.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

This study was a review of protocols from the National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment and Public Health Research programmes. Protocols were included if the study was a randomized controlled trial and the intervention intended to change lifestyle or behavior to improve health or improve psychological outcomes.

RESULTS

95 of 151 protocols planned to record adverse events (AEs). Definitions of AEs were often not given and varied widely. Serious AEs were mostly defined using standards originally devised for pharmacological trials. Twenty-two protocols listed expected AEs. Few protocols described assessment of causation between AEs and intervention. Examples of useful AE recording practice were identified.

CONCLUSION

Monitoring and recording AEs in behavioral intervention trials was variable and frequently based on reporting guidelines for pharmacological trials. This may mean potential harms are being missed. Future trials should consider: 1) Potential harms posed by the intervention 2) How to define serious AEs 3) What are expected AEs. Further research to achieve consensus on AE recording is required, including identification of core adverse outcomes in clinical areas or caused by interventions.

Design and analysis of three-arm parallel cluster randomized trials with small numbers of clusters

In this article, we review and evaluate a number of methods used in the design and analysis of small three-arm parallel cluster randomized trials. We conduct a simulation-based study to evaluate restricted randomization methods including covariate-constrained randomization and a novel method for matched-group cluster randomization. We also evaluate the appropriate modelling of the data and small sample inferential methods for a variety of treatment effects relevant to three-arm trials. Our results indicate that small-sample corrections are required for high (0.05) but not low (0.001) values of the intraclass correlation coefficient and their performance can depend on trial design, number of clusters, and the nature of the hypothesis being tested. The Satterthwaite correction generally performed best at an ICC of 0.05 with a nominal type I error rate for single-period trials, and in trials with repeated measures type I error rates were between 0.04 and 0.06. Restricted randomization methods produce little benefit in trials with repeated measures but in trials with single post-intervention design can provide relatively large gains in power when compared to the most unbalanced possible allocations. Matched-group randomization improves power but is not as effective as covariate-constrained randomization. For model-based analysis, adjusting for fewer covariates than were used in a restricted randomization process under any design can produce non-nominal type I error rates and reductions in power. Where comparisons to two-arm cluster trials are possible, the performance of the methods is qualitatively very similar.

Comparing 24 h physical activity profiles: Office workers, women with a history of gestational diabetes and people with chronic disease condition(s)

This study demonstrates a novel data-driven method of summarising accelerometer data to profile physical activity in three diverse groups, compared with cut-point determined moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). GGIR was used to generate average daily acceleration, intensity gradient, time in MVPA and MX metrics (acceleration above which the most active X-minutes accumulate) from wrist-worn accelerometer data from three datasets: office-workers (OW, N = 697), women with a history of post-gestational diabetes (PGD, N = 267) and adults with ≥1 chronic disease (CD, N = 1,325). Average acceleration and MVPA were lower in CD, but not PGD, relative to OW (-5.2 mg and -30.7 minutes, respectively, P < 0.001). Both PGD and CD had poorer intensity distributions than OW (P < 0.001). Application of a cut-point to the M30 showed 7%, 17% and 28%, of OW, PGD and CD, respectively, accumulated 30 minutes of brisk walking per day. Radar plots showed OW had higher overall activity than CD. The relatively poor intensity distribution of PGD, despite similar overall activity to OW, was due to accumulation of more light and less higher intensity activity. These data-driven methods identify aspects of activity that differ between groups, which may be missed by cut-point methods alone. Abbreviations: CD: Adults with ≥1 chronic disease; mg: Milli-gravitational unit; MVPA: Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity; OW: Office workers; PGD: Women with a history of post-gestational diabetes; VPA: Vigorous physical activity.

Physical behaviors and chronotype in people with type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Previous investigations have suggested that evening chronotypes may be more susceptible to obesity-related metabolic alterations. However, whether device-measured physical behaviors differ by chronotype in those with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) remains unknown.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This analysis reports data from the ongoing Chronotype of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Effect on Glycaemic Control (CODEC) observational study. Eligible participants were recruited from both primary and secondary care settings in the Midlands area, UK. Participants were asked to wear an accelerometer (GENEActiv, ActivInsights, Kimbolton, UK) on their non-dominant wrist for 7 days to quantify different physical behaviors (sleep, sedentary, light, moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), intensity gradient, average acceleration and the acceleration above which the most active continuous 2, 10, 30 and 60 min are accumulated). Chronotype preference (morning, intermediate or evening) was assessed using the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire. Multiple linear regression analyses assessed whether chronotype preference was associated with physical behaviors and their timing. Evening chronotypes were considered as the reference group.

RESULTS

635 participants were included (age=63.8±8.4 years, 34.6% female, body mass index=30.9±5.1 kg/m²). 25% (n=159) of the cohort were morning chronotypes, 52% (n=330) intermediate and 23% (n=146) evening chronotypes. Evening chronotypes had higher sedentary time (28.7 min/day, 95% CI 8.6 to 48.3) and lower MVPA levels (-9.7 min/day, -14.9 to -4.6) compared to morning chronotypes. The intensity of the most active continuous 2-60 min of the day, average acceleration and intensity gradient were lower in evening chronotypes. The timing of physical behaviors also differed across chronotypes, with evening chronotypes displaying a later sleep onset and consistently later physical activity time.

CONCLUSIONS

People with T2DM lead a lifestyle characterized by sedentary behaviors and insufficient MVPA. This may be exacerbated in those with a preference for 'eveningness' (ie, go to bed late and get up late).

Impact of a low-cost standing desk on reducing workplace sitting (StandUP UBC): A randomised controlled trial

Sit-stand desks can reduce occupational sitting time, however, their cost can limit scalability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of a low-cost standing desk on objectively-measured occupational sitting and prolonged sitting bouts over 3- and 6-months. Secondary outcomes included self-report work engagement and occupational fatigue. Forty-eight office employees (91.7% female, M_age = 39.8 ± 10.1) were randomized to receive a low-cost standing desk or to a control group. At 3-months, the intervention group sat 0.7 h (42min) less at work compared to the control group; F(1, 45) = 5.90, partial η² = 0.12, p = .019. The effect was small, yet comparable to findings from studies using costlier alternatives. However, these reductions were not maintained at 6-months. No changes in prolonged sitting bouts or secondary outcomes were found. There is some potential for low-cost standing desk converters as a scalable workplace health intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03375749, Registered 18 December 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03375749?term=NCT03375749&rank=1.