Standing desks for sedentary occupations: Assessing changes in satisfaction and health outcomes after six months of use

The effectiveness of a 6-month intervention with sit-stand workstation in office workers: Results from the SUFHA cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Prolonged periods of sitting have been linked to negative health outcomes. Implementation of sit-stand desks in the workplace has been one strategy to reduce prolonged sitting.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of sit-stand workstations on reducing sitting time and improving other health outcomes of office-based workers.

METHODS

39 Portuguese office workers were randomized into a 6-month parallel-group cluster RCT consisting by the implementation of sit-stand desks in the workplace. The primary outcome of sitting time was assessed using ActivPAL. Secondary outcomes included biometric, psychological, and diet-related variables. All outcomes were assessed at baseline and 6 months for the whole sample and at 3 months for a sub-sample of the intervention group (n = 11).

RESULTS

No significant time*group interaction was found for the primary or secondary outcomes, apart from waist circumference favoring the control group (Δ-1.81 cm, pinteraction = 0.04). There were significant changes within the intervention group for sitting time (-44.0 min/day), prolonged sitting (>30 min) (-45.3 min/day) and standing time (51.7 min/day) at 3 months in the sub-sample and in prolonged sitting (>30 min) (-26 min/day) in the full intervention group (p < 0.05). Changes were also observed within the intervention group for percent body fat (Δ-3.7%) and ratings of quality of life (Δ2.2), musculoskeletal discomfort (Δ-4.9), overall fatigue (Δ-2.2), and the need for recovery after work (Δ-1.7) at 6-month follow-up (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Although not being effective for reducing sitting time, the implementation of sit-stand desks in the Portuguese workspace was shown to be feasible over the long term, received well by users, and may offer other health benefits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

OSF Registration, OSF.IO/JHGPW. Registered 15 November 2022. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JHGPW.

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.

Sit-Stand Desks and Physical Self-care Behaviors in a Family Medicine Residency

INTRODUCTION

More than 50% of primary care physicians' practice involves sedentary desk work. Growing evidence suggests a link between sedentary workplace behaviors and increased morbidity and mortality. Research on the effects of sit-stand desks in the workplace suggests that sit-stand desks reduce sedentary behaviors. This study examined the use and satisfaction of adjustable desks with a height of sit-stand and their association with physical self-care behaviors among family medicine residents.

METHODS

We conducted a longitudinal cohort survey study at a 9-9-9 family medicine residency after the clinic installed height-adjustable sit-stand desks in January 2020. Standardized questions about the use and satisfaction of adjustable sit-stand desks and physical self-care behaviors were administered in June 2020, December 2020, and December 2021. The survey also included an open text box for feedback.

RESULTS

Median time spent standing at the sit-stand desks was 55.0%. The percentage of time standing was similar across June 2020, December 2020, and December 2021. The average satisfaction rate with the desks across all time points was 71.4%. We did not observe significant differences in the proportion of residents' satisfaction with the adjustable desks over time. Residents who reported standing at the adjustable desk reported increased satisfaction with the desks (Kendall's τ=.38, P<.001) and with physical self-care behaviors (Kendall's τ=.25, P<.05). Themes associated with desk dissatisfaction revolved around limited desktop space.

CONCLUSION

Over a nearly 1.5-year period, more than half of family medicine residents reported standing at their adjustable desks and being satisfied with them. Residents who reported standing at adjustable desks also reported increased physical self-care behaviors. Residency programs investing in sit-stand desks may consider options that allow for increased desktop surface space.

Effect of a 6-month sedentary behavior reduction intervention on well-being and workplace health in desk workers with low back pain

BACKGROUND: Research suggests reducing sedentary behavior improves low back pain; however, the impact on presenteeism, health, productivity, and sleep in desk workers with chronic low back pain is not known. OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the effect of a sedentary behavior intervention on multiple dimensions of workplace health. METHODS: 24 participants with chronic low back pain and desk jobs were randomized to either a sedentary behavior reduction intervention group or control. Outcomes included a modified Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ), the Stanford Presenteeism Scale (SPS), Profile of Mood States (POMS), Health and Work Questionnaire (HWQ), SF-36 Health Survey (SF-36), and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Six-month changes in outcomes were compared across intervention groups using ANCOVA regression, adjusting for baseline values. Cohen’s d effect sizes were calculated for outcomes to explain the magnitude of group differences. RESULTS: The intervention group reported 1.5 hours/day less sitting time (p < 0.001) compared to controls at 6 months. SF-36 subscales of energy/fatigue, social functioning, and pain improved, and sleep disturbance was reduced among intervention participants. Productivity, concentration, and presenteeism were unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: A sedentary behavior reduction intervention may improve well-being and workplace health without impacting productivity and concentration in desk workers with chronic low back pain.

Effects of sedentary behaviour interventions on biomarkers of cardiometabolic risk in adults: systematic review with meta-analyses

CONTEXT/PURPOSE

Observational and acute laboratory intervention research has shown that excessive sedentary time is associated adversely with cardiometabolic biomarkers. This systematic review with meta-analyses synthesises results from free living interventions targeting reductions in sedentary behaviour alone or combined with increases in physical activity.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched up to August 2019 for sedentary behaviour interventions in adults lasting for ≥7 days publishing cardiometabolic biomarker outcomes covering body anthropometry, blood pressure, glucose and lipid metabolism, and inflammation (54 studies). The pooled effectiveness of intervention net of control on 15 biomarker outcomes was evaluated using random effects meta-analyses in the studies with control groups not providing other relevant interventions (33 studies; 6-25 interventions analysed).

RESULTS

Interventions between 2 weeks and <6 months in non-clinical populations from North America, Europe and Australia comprised much of the evidence base. Pooled effects revealed small, significant (p<0.05) beneficial effects on weight (≈ -0.6 kg), waist circumference (≈ -0.7 cm), percentage body fat (≈ -0.3 %), systolic blood pressure (≈ -1.1 mm Hg), insulin (≈ -1.4 pM) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≈ 0.04 mM). Pooled effects on the other biomarkers (p>0.05) were also small, and beneficial in direction except for fat-free mass (≈ 0.0 kg). Heterogeneity ranged widely (I2=0.0-72.9).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review of interventions targeting sedentary behaviour reductions alone, or combined with increases in physical activity, found evidence of effectiveness for improving some cardiometabolic risk biomarkers to a small degree. There was insufficient evidence to evaluate inflammation or vascular function. Key limitations to the underlying evidence base include a paucity of high-quality studies, interventions lasting for ≥12 months, sensitive biomarkers and clinical study populations (eg, type 2 diabetes).

PROSPERO TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016041742.

Pain symptoms are reported earlier than quantitative measures of low back pain during prolonged standing

BACKGROUND

Along with quantitative measures, pain symptoms may help inform early interventions to prevent prolonged standing induced low back pain (LBP); however, the relationship between quantitative and qualitative measures has not been assessed.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the relationship between qualitative and quantitative measures of pain development during prolonged standing induced LBP development.

METHODS

Thirty-five participants performed two-hours of standing. A visual analog scale (VAS) and the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire were used to assess the participant's LBP every 7.5-minutes. Participants were classified as a pain developer (PD) based on VAS scores or three consecutive pain symptom reports.

RESULTS

Pain symptom reports occurred 31.3 (±24.8) minutes earlier than the VAS reports. Eight participants (44%) were non-PDs with the VAS and PDs with the symptom method (p = 0.0047).

CONCLUSIONS

A subset of participants who were not categorized as LBP developers during prolonged standing using the VAS method still report LBP symptoms. The inclusion of pain symptom reporting could provide additional information for practitioners when identifying individuals who would benefit from early interventions for standing induced LBP.