Long-Term Access to Sit-Stand Workstations in a Large Office Population: User Profiles Reveal Differences in Sitting Time and Perceptions

Stand-Capable Workstations Reduce Occupational Sedentary Time Among Administrative Workers

OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSIn this study, we found that workers who use stand-biased desks stood more and sat less during their workday compared to workers who use traditional desks. Stand-biased users also experienced significantly less lower back discomfort compared to both traditional and sit-stand workstation users. Based on these findings, we recommend that the use of stand-biased workstations be considered when designing or renovating work office workspaces. The health risks of sedentary behavior are inherent in most office work, but these risks can be alleviated with intentional equipment choices. Using stand-biased desks can encourage workers to move more throughout the workday without their productivity or comfort being disturbed.

Do Sit-Stand Tables Affect Physical Behavior and Body Composition Similarly in Normal-Weight and Overweight Office Workers? A Pilot Study

OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSSedentary behavior is a significant health concern among office workers. We completed the same 6-month sit-stand table intervention at work for groups of normal-weight and overweight workers, and compared it to not having sit-stand tables. The intervention caused the intended decrease in sitting time in both groups and a corresponding increase in standing. We did not find compensation effects on physical behavior outside of work. Furthermore, the intervention did not change the composition of fat, lean, and bone mass in either group. Thus, strategies including initiatives to increase physical activity are likely needed to have effects on body composition; and an intervention needs to be sustained for longer than six months for any changes in body composition to be observed.

Shared Autonomy to Reduce Sedentary Behavior Among Sit-Stand Desk Users in the United States and India: Web-Based Study

BACKGROUND

Fitness technologies such as wearables and sit-stand desks are increasingly being used to fight sedentary lifestyles by encouraging physical activity. However, adherence to such technologies decreases over time because of apathy and increased dismissal of behavioral nudges.

OBJECTIVE

To address this problem, we introduced shared autonomy in the context of sit-stand desks, where user input is integrated with robot autonomy to control the desk and reduce sedentary behavior and investigated user reactions and preferences for levels of automation with a sit-stand desk. As demographics affect user acceptance of robotic technology, we also studied how perceptions of nonvolitional behavior change differ across cultures (United States and India), sex, familiarity, dispositional factors, and health priming messages.

METHODS

We conducted a web-based vignette study in the United States and India where a total of 279 participants watched video vignettes of a person interacting with sit-stand desks of various levels of automation and answered questions about their perceptions of the desks such as ranking of the different levels of automation.

RESULTS

Participants generally preferred either manual or semiautonomous desks over the fully autonomous option (P<.001). However, participants in India were generally more amenable to the idea of nonvolitional interventions from the desk than participants in the United States (P<.001). Male participants had a stronger desire for having control over the desk than female participants (P=.01). Participants who were more familiar with sit-stand desks were more likely to adopt autonomous sit-stand desks (P=.001). No effects of health priming messages were observed. We estimated the projected health outcome by combining ranking data and hazard ratios from previous work and found that the semiautonomous desk led to the highest projected health outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that the shared autonomy desk is the optimal level of automation in terms of both user preferences and estimated projected health outcomes. Demographics such as culture and sex had significant effects on how receptive users were to autonomous intervention. As familiarity improves the likelihood of adoption, we propose a gradual behavior change intervention to increase acceptance and adherence, especially for populations with a high desire for control.

Does active sitting provide more physiological changes than traditional sitting and standing workstations?

This cross-sectional study examined the physiological effects of two active chairs (AC1: had the feature to pedal and slide forward; AC2: was a multiaxial chair) compared to a traditional office chair and standing workstation. Twenty-four healthy participants computed at each of the workstations for 60 min. The active protocol was to alternate between a pedalling/side-to-side motion and sliding forward/front-to-back motion to the sound of a metronome operating at 40 bpm. The participants' physiological effects were recorded using near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS); electrodermal activity (EDA) and a heart rate (HR) monitor for each collection period. Statistical analysis was conducted using a repeated measures analysis of variance for within-task and between-workstation comparisons. A Tukey's post hoc analysis was calculated for significant findings. Both active chairs significantly increased oxygenated blood in the gastrocnemius and participants' heart rate and EDA (stress) levels were affected slightly by task and time. However, participants felt more "productive" sitting in the control chair than in either of the active chairs.

Different sit:stand time ratios within a 30-minute cycle change perceptions related to musculoskeletal disorders

Regular standing interruptions to sedentary work are recommended, but their dosage is understudied. To measure perception variations associated with different sit:stand ratios, 16 people used six ratios (30:0, 27:3, 24:6, 21:9, 18:12 and 15:15) within 30-min cycles in their normal office environment. At start and end of each workday, study participants recorded their perception of 11 factors on a 10-point scale. Musculoskeletal discomfort in 10 body regions was measured before and after exposure to sit-stand ratios. Overall preferred ratios were recorded. Sit:stand ratio affected all perceived factors, with impact varying. Standing at least 6 min improved results most overall; however, individual perceived factors were least impacted by any of 30:0, 27:3, 24:6 or 21:9. Preferred sit:stand ratios were 15:15, 18:12 and 21:9. Typically, least liked ratios involved briefest standing (30:0, 27:3, 24:6) although two participants least liked 15:15. Understanding these variations contributes to appropriate standing dosage recommendations.

Systematic Review of the Influence of Physical Work Environment on Office Workers' Physical Activity Behavior

BACKGROUND

Many American workers spend over 7 hours a day at work in primarily sedentary office work. Physical activity is a key aspect of optimizing health and preventing disease; yet, 80% of American adults do not meet the recommended guidelines for physical activity. In this systematic review, the relationship between physical work environment and physical activity among office workers was explored.

METHODS

Of the 321 studies screened, 26 studies met the eligibility criteria and were included for evaluation in this systematic review.

RESULTS

Of the 26 studies, four were cross-sectional studies, 14 were quasi-experimental studies, and eight were randomized control trials. Physical activity during the workday was measured using self-report surveys and electromechanical devices such as accelerometers. Physical work environments examined by the studies included different types of desks (n = 16), office arrangements (n = 5), and building design (n = 5). In nine studies, office environments and building work environments designed to promote activity using active design principles such as stairs and flexible workspaces were associated with increased physical activity. Sit-stand desks reduced overall sitting time, but had a minimal effect on physical activity.

CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

Offices and buildings designed for activity had the largest impact on physical activity among office workers. To increase physical activity in office workers, focus should be placed on opportunities to increase incidental movement that can increase physical activity throughout the workday. Occupational health nurses should advocate workspace designs that can increase physical activity in workers.

Usage of sit-stand workstations: Benefits and barriers from decision makers' perspective in Australia

The aim of this cross-sectional mixed-method study was to understand the current use, and practices to support the implementation, of sit-stand workstations (SSWs) from the perspective of furniture purchasing decision makers in Australian organisations. An online survey, and in-depth interviews with a purposive sub-sample were conducted. A total of 216 eligible participants from 150 organisations across 18 sectors completed the survey with 17 interviews conducted. 40% of organisations provided SSWs on request while 41% reported not using them appropriately. Over half provided no training on the appropriate use of SSWs (n = 109, 51%) nor used any strategies to enhance their use (n = 163, 84%). From the interviews, SSWs were perceived effective in reducing discomforts and increasing employees' satisfaction and productivity. Lack of resources and guidelines to support SSW usage, and lack of wellbeing knowledge, were identified as barriers. Education and ongoing monitoring are important to enhance the appropriate use and uptake of SSWs.

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

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.

Natural Patterns of Sitting, Standing and Stepping During and Outside Work-Differences between Habitual Users and Non-Users of Sit-Stand Workstations

Sit-stand workstations have shown to reduce sitting time in office workers on a group level. However, movement behaviour patterns might differ between subgroups of workers. Therefore, the objective of this study was to examine sitting, standing and stepping outcomes between habitual users and non-users of sit-stand workstations. From an international office population based in the Netherlands, 24 users and 25 non-users of sit-stand workstations were included (all had long-term access to these workstations). Using the ActivPAL, sitting, standing and stepping were objectively measured during and outside working hours. Differences in outcomes between users and non-users were analysed using linear regression. During working hours, users sat less (-1.64; 95% IC= -2.27--1.01 hour/8 hour workday) and stood more (1.51; 95% IC= 0.92-2.10 hour/8 hour workday) than non-users. Attenuated but similar differences were also found for total sitting time over the whole week. Furthermore, time in static standing bouts was relatively high for users during working hours (median= 0.56; IQR = 0.19-1.08 hour/8 hour workday). During non-working hours on workdays and during non-working days, no differences were found between users and non-users. During working hours, habitual users of their sit-stand workstation sat substantially less and stood proportionally more than non-users. No differences were observed outside working hours, leading to attenuated but similar differences in total sitting and standing time between users and non-users for total days. This indicated that the users of sit-stand workstations reduced their sitting time at work, but this seemed not to be accompanied by major carry-over or compensatory effects outside working hours.

Implementing a Physical Activity Promoting Program in a Flex-Office: A Process Evaluation with a Mixed Methods Design

The aim of this study was to investigate facilitating and hindering factors when implementing a physical activity (PA)-promoting program among office workers moving to a flex office, by conducting a process evaluation. Additionally, we evaluated self-reported and perceived PA behaviors. With a mixed methods design, analyses were based upon data from interviews with 70 employees and repeated questionnaires from 152 employees. The PA-promoting program was fully implemented and supported by management. There was a strong health promoting culture, encouraging PA in the organization already at the start of the study. The lecture and the office design were rated as the most motivating program components. The use of stairs, breaks during meetings and social acceptance for standing and walking at work increased. Employees described a strive for variation, and how managers, the office environment, productivity and ergonomic aspects influenced sedentary behavior (SB) and PA. The need for the PA-promoting program was questioned, and the timing of the program was debated. To conclude, a strong organizational health culture combined with a facilitating physical environment can create sustainable positive PA behaviors in office settings. A thorough understanding of organizational needs and a participatory process are needed to tailor organizational interventions to decrease SB.

Standing is not enough: A randomized crossover study on the acute cardiometabolic effects of variations in sitting in healthy young men

OBJECTIVES

Standing desks and stability balls are increasingly popular to increase muscle activity and thereby prevent potential adverse cardiometabolic effects of prolonged sitting. The present study examined the effects of (1) sitting on a stability ball ('active sitting') and (2) hourly 10-min standing interruptions during prolonged sitting on postprandial cardiometabolic biomarkers.

DESIGN

Experimental crossover study.

METHODS

Twenty healthy-weight males (19.2±0.6years) participated randomly in three 5-h conditions: (1) sitting on an office chair (SIT), (2) sitting on a stability ball (SIT-ACTIVE) and (3) sitting with hourly 10-min standing interruptions (SIT-STAND). In each condition, participants consumed a standardized mixed meal at baseline. Hourly blood samples and pre/post saliva samples were collected and analyzed for levels of insulin, glucose and cortisol. Pre/post hemodynamic monitoring (middle finger; Nexfin-monitoring) was conducted; heart rate was measured continuously (Polar) and muscle activity (leg and lower-back, Portilab) was measured during periods of sitting (on an office chair and on a stability ball) and standing.

RESULTS

Muscle activity and heart rate during standing periods were significantly higher than during sitting (both SIT and SIT-ACTIVE). Generalized estimating equations revealed no significant difference in any of the biomarkers between the three experimental conditions. Systolic blood pressure was lower during SIT-STAND, while stroke volume was lower during SIT-ACTIVE than during SIT. Although significant, these differences were small, approximating the day-to-day variability in blood pressure and stroke volume.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that hourly standing interruptions during 5h prolonged sitting or continuously sitting on a stability ball do not significantly affect postprandial cardiometabolic biomarkers in healthy young men.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered in the NTR trial register (NTRcode 5723).