Using sit-to-stand workstations in offices: is there a compensation effect?
Article
Article Title | Using sit-to-stand workstations in offices: is there a compensation effect? |
---|---|
ERA Journal ID | 9788 |
Article Category | Article |
Authors | Mansoubi, Maedeh (Author), Pearson, Natalie (Author), Biddle, Stuart J. H. (Author) and Clemes, Stacy A. (Author) |
Journal Title | Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise |
Journal Citation | 48 (4), pp. 720-725 |
Number of Pages | 6 |
Year | 2016 |
Publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
Place of Publication | United States |
ISSN | 0195-9131 |
1530-0315 | |
Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | https://doi.org/10.1249/MSS.0000000000000802 |
Web Address (URL) | http://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com/sp-3.25.0a/ovidweb.cgi?QS2=434f4e1a73d37e8c00586f3002aa4aac0f01f2bc76988469ddf0d51f23007fbd5ae0015c9813d5141f0f87abe1564f249078b6a61f2ee88a2cc10c0b20ec50c66b59bb4c56feb759e920941fd596c8e5b0dd0f74183696ddbd9b0ab99c4a36da7267554637 |
Abstract | Purpose Sit-to-stand workstations are becoming common in modern offices and are increasingly being implemented in sedentary behavior interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the introduction of such a workstation among office workers leads to reductions in sitting during working hours, and whether office workers compensate for any reduction in sitting at work by increasing sedentary time and decreasing physical activity (PA) outside work. Methods Office workers (n = 40; 55% female) were given a WorkFit-S, sit-to-stand workstation for 3 months. Participants completed assessments at baseline (before workstation installation), 1 wk and 6 wk after the introduction of the workstation, and again at 3 months (postintervention). Posture and PA were assessed using the activPAL inclinometer and ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer, which participants wore for 7 d during each measurement phase. Results Compared with baseline, the proportion of time spent sitting significantly decreased (75% ± 13% vs 52% ± 16% to 56% ± 13%), and time spent standing and in light activity significantly increased (standing: 19% ± 12% vs 32% ± 12% to 37% ± 15%, light PA: 14% ± 4% vs 16% ± 5%) during working hours at all follow-up assessments. However, compared with baseline, the proportion of time spent sitting significantly increased (60% ± 11% vs 66% ± 12% to 68% ± 12%) and light activity significantly decreased (21% ± 5% vs 19% ± 5%) during nonworking hours across the follow-up measurements. No differences were seen in moderate-to-vigorous activity during nonworking hours throughout the study. Conclusion The findings suggest that introducing a sit-to-stand workstation can significantly reduce sedentary time and increase light activity levels during working hours. However, these changes were compensated for by reducing activity and increasing sitting outside of working hours. An intervention of a sit-to-stand workstation should be accompanied by an intervention outside of working hours to limit behavior compensation. |
Keywords | OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH; OFFICE WORKERS; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; SEDENTARY BEHAVIOR; SEDENTARY COMPENSATION; STANDING DESK; Actigraphy; Adult; Exercise; Female; Health Behavior; Humans; Interior Design and Furnishings; Male; Posture; Sedentary Lifestyle; Time Factors; Workplace; Young Adult; General; |
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020 | 420702. Exercise physiology |
Public Notes | Files associated with this item cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions. |
Byline Affiliations | Loughborough University, United Kingdom |
Institution of Origin | University of Southern Queensland |
https://research.usq.edu.au/item/q41x0/using-sit-to-stand-workstations-in-offices-is-there-a-compensation-effect
1248
total views8
total downloads5
views this month0
downloads this month