Is sitting invisible? Exploring how people mentally represent sitting

"Are we working (too) comfortably?": a focus group study to understand sedentary behaviour when working at home and identify intervention strategies

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemic initiated an enduring shift in working patterns, with many employees now working at home (w@h). This shift has exacerbated existing high levels of occupational sedentary behaviour (SB) in office workers, which is a recognised risk to health and well-being. This study aimed to use the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to better understand both employees' SB, and line managers behaviour to assist employees to reduce SB when w@h, and identify how employees can best be supported to reduce SB.

METHODS

Three online focus groups with employees aged 18-40 working in desk-based roles (e.g. administrative / sales / customer services) (n = 21), and three with line managers (n = 21) were conducted. The focus groups facilitated discussion regarding participants' current behaviour, what impacts it, and what could be done to reduce employee SB when w@h. The focus group data were thematically analysed guided by the COM-B framework to understand influences on behaviour, and to identify promising intervention strategies.

RESULTS

Most participants recognised that w@h had elevated employee occupational SB, and line managers reported the importance of supporting employees to manage their workload, and encouraging and modelling taking breaks. There were multiple influences on both employee and line manager behaviour with capability, opportunity and motivation all perceived as influential, although not equally. For example, a major theme related to the reduced physical opportunities for employees to reduce their SB when w@h, including blurred work-life boundaries. Changes in physical opportunities also made supporting employees challenging for line managers. Additionally, the w@h environment included unique social opportunities that negatively impacted the behaviour of both groups, including an expectation to always be present online, and social norms. A range of strategies for reducing SB when w@h at both individual and organisational level were suggested.

CONCLUSIONS

It was evident that SB when w@h is influenced by a range of factors, and therefore multi-component intervention strategies are likely to be most effective in reducing SB. Future intervention research is a priority to evaluate and refine strategies, and inform w@h guidance to protect both the short-term and long-term health consequences of elevated SB for those who continue to w@h.

A behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

To document the experiences of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who underwent a behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour (SB) in a clinical trial.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to explore perspectives of the behaviour change intervention and specific intervention components in people with stable COPD on the waitlist for pulmonary rehabilitation.

SETTING

Three outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programmes in Sydney, Australia.

INTERVENTIONS

The six-week behaviour change intervention with once weekly contact with a physiotherapist aimed to reduce SB by replacing it with light-intensity physical activity (PA) and by breaking up prolonged SB.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Of 30 participants who completed the behaviour change intervention, interviews were conducted with 13 participants and analysed using the 'capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour (COM-B)' framework of behaviour change.

RESULTS

Intervention components regarded as most helpful by participants were verbal education on health consequences on SB, goal setting, and self-monitoring of, and feedback on, step count using activity trackers. There was a clear preference during goal setting to increase PA rather than to reduce SB. Physical limitations and enjoyment of SB were the most reported barriers to reducing SB.

CONCLUSIONS

Goal setting, verbal education, and self-monitoring of, and feedback on step count, were viewed positively by people with COPD and may show promise for reducing SB and increasing PA based on individual preference. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Sedentary behavior and lifespan brain health

Higher levels of physical activity are known to benefit aspects of brain health across the lifespan. However, the role of sedentary behavior (SB) is less well understood. In this review we summarize and discuss evidence on the role of SB on brain health (including cognitive performance, structural or functional brain measures, and dementia risk) for different age groups, critically compare assessment approaches to capture SB, and offer insights into emerging opportunities to assess SB via digital technologies. Across the lifespan, specific characteristics of SB (particularly whether they are cognitively active or cognitively passive) potentially act as moderators influencing the associations between SB and specific brain health outcomes. We outline challenges and opportunities for future research aiming to provide more robust empirical evidence on these observations.

Reliability and validity of self-report questions for assessing levels of physical activity and sedentary time in adult childhood cancer survivors

BACKGROUND

Regular physical activity and limited sedentary time are recommended for adult childhood cancer survivors. The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare designed a questionnaire to assess levels of physical activity (BHW-Q), including two questions: one on vigorous physical activity (BHW-Q VPA) and one on moderate physical activity (BHW-Q MPA). Furthermore, a single-item question was developed to measure sedentary time (SED-GIH-Q). These questions are recommended for clinical practice and have been found valid for the general population but have so far not been tested in adult childhood cancer survivors. The aim of the study was to assess test-retest reliability, agreement and criterion-related validity of the BHW-Q and the SED-GIH-Q in adult childhood cancer survivors.

METHOD

A non-experimental methodological study. In total 60 participants (50% women), median age 28 (min-max 18-54) years were included at the Long-Term Follow-Up Clinic at Sahlgrenska University Hospital. Participants were instructed to wear an accelerometer for seven days, and to answer the BHW-Q and the SED-GIH-Q before and after the seven days. Test-retest reliability and criterion-related validity comparing the BHW-Q and SED GIH-Q with accelerometer data were calculated with weighted Kappa (k) (agreement) and by using Spearman´s rho (r) (correlation).

RESULTS

Test-retest reliability regarding the SED-GIH-Q showed a high agreement (k = 0.88) and very strong correlation (r = 0.93), while the BHW-Q showed a moderate agreement and moderately strong correlation, BHW-Q VPA (k = 0.50, r = 0.64), BHW-Q MPA (k = 0.47, r = 0.58). Both the agreement and the correlation of the criterion-related validity were interpreted as fair for the BHW-Q VPA (k = 0.29, r = 0.45), while the agreement for BHW-Q MPA was interpreted as low (k = 0.07), but the correlation as fair (r = 0.37). The agreement of the SED-GIH-Q (k = 0.13) was interpreted as low and the correlation as poor (r = 0.26).

CONCLUSION

These simple questions assessing physical activity and sedentary time can be used as screening tools in clinical practice to identify adult childhood cancer survivors in need of support to increase physical activity level. Further development is needed on the design of a sufficiently valid question measuring sedentary time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This research project was registered in the Swedish National Database of Research and Development; identifier 275251, November 25, 2020. https://www.researchweb.org/is/vgr/project/275251 .

Breaking the Habit? Identifying Discrete Dimensions of Sitting Automaticity and Their Responsiveness to a Sitting-Reduction Intervention

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence suggests that sitting is activated automatically on exposure to associated environments, yet no study has yet sought to identify in what ways sitting may be automatic.

METHOD

This study used data from a 12-month sitting-reduction intervention trial to explore discrete dimensions of sitting automaticity, and how these dimensions may be affected by an intervention. One hundred ninety-four office workers reported sitting automaticity at baseline, and 3 months, 6 months, 9 months and 12 months after receiving one of two sitting-reduction intervention variants.

RESULTS

Principal component analysis extracted two automaticity components, corresponding to a lack of awareness and a lack of control. Scores on both automaticity scales decreased over time post-intervention, indicating that sitting became more mindful, though lack of awareness scores were consistently higher than lack of control scores.

CONCLUSION

Attempts to break office workers' sitting habits should seek to enhance conscious awareness of alternatives to sitting and afford office workers a greater sense of control over whether they sit or stand.

Automatic processes moderate the association between reflective processes and movement behavior: A cross-sectional study

Dual-process theories postulate that both reflective and automatic processes regulate health behavior. Further research is required to test the basic postulates of dual-process theories. We investigated the direct associations and moderating effect between automatic processes and multiple indicators of reflective processes on various levels of physical activity and sedentary behavior assessed using accelerometry in adults who were not participating in regular physical exercise programs. This cross-sectional study included 257 adults. Each participant completed a computerized test for automatic associations, a set of questions assessing reflective processes, a seven-day assessment using accelerometers to determine their levels of physical activity and sedentary behavior. The results showed a direct relationship between perceived benefits (B = 15.90, p = 0.043), perceived cons (B = -12.81, p = 0.034), decisional intention (B = -0.07, p = 0.049) with light physical activity, and self-efficacy with daily steps (B = 485.71, p = 0.008). There was a positive association between intention strength and daily steps when implicit associations favored physical activity (b = 623.36, LLCI = 79.09, ULCI = 1167.62, p = 0.025); a negative association between self-efficacy and sedentary behavior when implicit associations favored sedentary behavior (b = -25.73, LLCI = -49.77, ULCI = -1.70, p = 0.035); and a positive association between intention strength and sedentary behavior when implicit associations favored physical activity (b = 34.18, LLCI = 8.81, ULCI = 59.56, p = 0.008). These findings underscore the importance of considering the interplay between reflective and automatic processes in shaping movement behavior.

Sitting vs. standing: an urgent need to rebalance our world

During their activities of daily living, humans run, walk, stand, sit and lie down. Recent changes in our environment have favored sedentary behavior over more physically active behavior to such a degree that our health is in danger. Here, we sought to address the problem of excessive time spent seated from various theoretical viewpoints, including postural control, human factors engineering, human history and health psychology. If nothing is done now, the high prevalence of sitting will continue to increase. We make a case for the standing position by demonstrating that spending more time upright can mitigate the physiological and psychological problems associated with excessive sitting without lowering task performance and productivity. The psychological literature even highlights potential benefits of performing certain tasks in the standing position. We propose a number of recommendations on spending more time (but not too much) in the standing position and on more active, nonambulatory behaviors. There is a need to inform people about (i) harmful consequences of excessive sitting and (ii) benefits of spending more time performing active, nonambulatory behaviors. One clear benefit is to reduce detrimental health consequences of excessive sitting and to provide potential additional benefits in terms of productivity and performance.

Why do people sit? A framework for targeted behavior change

To improve health and wellbeing, it is crucial that people regularly interrupt their sitting. In this paper, we propose a framework for examining and changing sitting behavior that addresses two key steps in the process towards developing effective interventions. First, we suggest that research should move away from its current focus on sitting time, which is an outcome of behavior. Rather, researchers should focus on stand-to-sit and sit-to-stand transitions, which are discrete units of behavior. Second, drawing on goal hierarchy models, we suggest that people rarely engage in stand-to-sit and sit-to-stand transitions for the purpose of being in a sitting or standing position; rather, we suggest that these transitions are means to higher-order goals (e.g., to complete work tasks, to watch television, to eat dinner). To improve adherence to and effectiveness of sitting behavior interventions, intervention designers should aim to increase the frequency of sit-to-stand (and stand-to-sit) transitions. To achieve this aim, intervention designers should capitalize on the higher-order goals that are typically served by these transitions. We suggest four concrete intervention strategies to increase sit-to-stand transitions in congruence with people's everyday goals. We also describe the implications of our framework for theory and methods in sitting behavior research.

Test-Retest Reliability, Agreement and Criterion Validity of Three Questionnaires for the Assessment of Physical Activity and Sedentary Time in Patients with Myocardial Infarction

Regular physical activity (PA) and limited sedentary time (SED) are highly recommended in international guidelines for patients after a myocardial infarction (MI). Data on PA and SED are often self-reported in clinical practice and, hence, reliable and valid questionnaires are crucial. This study aimed to assess the test-retest reliability, criterion validity and agreement of two PA and one SED questionnaire commonly used in clinical practice, developed by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare (BHW) and the Swedish national quality register SWEDEHEART. Data from 57 patients (mean age 66 ± 9.2 years, 42 males) was included in this multi-centre study. The patients answered three questionnaires on PA and SED at seven-day intervals and wore an accelerometer for seven days. Test-retest reliability, criterion validity and agreement were assessed using Spearman's rho and linearly weighted kappa. Test-retest reliability was moderate for three of the six-sub questions (k = 0.43-0.54) within the PA questionnaires. For criterion validity, the correlation was fair within three of the six sub-questions (r = 0.41-0.50) within the PA questionnaires. The SED questionnaire had low agreement (k = 0.12) and criterion validity (r = 0.30). The studied questionnaires for PA could be used in clinical practice as a screening tool and/or to evaluate the level of PA in patients with an MI. Future research is recommended to develop and/or evaluate SED questionnaires in patients with an MI.

A Social Cognitive Assessment of Workplace Sedentary Behavior among a Sample of University Employees

Sedentary behavior (SB) is an important public health concern. Adults working in desk-based occupations spend a considerable proportion of the workday sitting. More information is needed regarding the factors that contribute to occupational SB. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of social cognitive theory (SCT) to explain work-related SB using a quantitative, cross-sectional design by administering an online questionnaire. Participants included 381 full-time employees at a large, public university in the south-central United States. Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to determine the relationship between SCT constructs and SB. Mean work-related SB was 5.95 (SD = 1.30) h/8 h workday. In model 1, 9.6% of the total variance in SB was accounted for by standing desk ownership and physical activity level (p = 0.001; R2 = 0.096). In model 2, SCT constructs led to a statistically significant R2 increase of 4.9% (p < 0.001), where standing desk ownership, physical activity, and self-efficacy explained 13.3% of the variance in work-related SB. Findings from this study suggest that self-efficacy may be an important factor in explaining variation in occupational SB. Public health researchers and practitioners should consider strategies to address self-efficacy when developing workplace interventions to target occupational SB.

Working From Home: Experiences of Home-Working, Health Behavior and Well-Being During the 2020 UK COVID-19 Lockdown

OBJECTIVE

The Spring 2020 UK COVID-19 lockdown required normally office-based workers to modify their work-related practices to work at home. This study explored workers' experiences of adapting to home working, health behaviors and well-being.

METHODS

Twenty-seven home working employees (19 women; aged 23-57 years), from various industry sectors, gave individual semi-structured interviews. Topics focused on home working experiences, routine adaptations, and changes in health behaviors and well-being.

RESULTS

Four themes were extracted: changes to the work interface; adaptations to a new workspace; changes to work-life balance; and adjustments to a new social context. Notably, participants reported greater reliance on computer-based interactions, which they felt discouraged physical activity and increased sitting. Working in a domestic environment reportedly challenged work-home boundaries.

CONCLUSIONS

Work practices can incidentally detrimentally impact health-related behaviors and well-being. Organizations should develop policies and procedures to promote health-conducive home working.

I Sit but I Don't Know Why: Investigating the Multiple Precursors of Leisure-Time Sedentary Behaviors

Background: Precursors driving leisure-time sedentary behaviors remain poorly investigated, despite their detrimental consequences. This study aimed to investigate the predictive validity of controlled and automatic motivational precursors toward reducing sedentary behaviors and being physically active on leisure-time sedentary behaviors. The influence of demographic, physical, socio-professional, interpersonal, and environmental variables was also examined and compared with the associations of motivational precursors. Methods: 125 adults completed questionnaires measuring controlled motivational precursors (i.e., intentions, perceived competence), demographical (i.e., sex and age), physical (i.e., body mass index), and interpersonal (i.e., number of children) variables. Regarding automatic motivational precursors, habit strength and approach-avoidance tendencies were captured using the Self-Report Behavioral Automaticity Index and a manikin task. Time at work was computed as a socio-professional variable, days of the week and weather conditions were recorded as environmental precursors. Participants wore an accelerometer for 7 days and leisure time was identified using notebooks. Associations between the different precursors and the leisure-time sedentary behaviors were examined in linear mixed effect models. Results: Intention to be physically active and habit strength toward physical activity were negatively associated with leisure-time sedentary behaviors. Sex, body mass index, time at work, number of children, day of the week, and weather conditions were more strongly associated with leisure-time sedentary behaviors. Conclusion: Our findings show that, in comparison with other variables, the influence of motivational precursors on leisure-time sedentary behaviors is limited. This study supports the adoption of a broad-spectrum of precursors when predicting sedentary behaviors.

Convergent validity of commonly used questions assessing physical activity and sedentary time in Swedish patients after myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend regular physical activity (PA) and decreased sedentary time (SED) for patients after myocardial infarction (MI). Therefore, valid self-assessment of PA is vital in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to assess the convergent validity of commonly used PA and SED questions recommended by the National Board of Health and welfare (NBHW) and national SWEDEHEART-registry using accelerometers as the reference method in patients after MI.

METHODS

Data were obtained 2017-2021 among Swedish men and women (180 assessments). Participants answered five commonly used PA and SED-questions (by NBHW and SWEDEHEART) and wore an accelerometer (Actigraph GT3X) for seven days. Convergent validity was assessed gradually by; Kruskall Wallis-, Sperman rho, Weighted Kappa- and ROC-analyses. Misclassification was explored by Chi-square analyses with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustment.

RESULTS

The strongest correlation (r = 0.37) was found for the SED-GIH question (NBHW). For PA, no specific question stood out, with correlations of r = 0.31 (NBWH), and r = 0.24-0.30 (SWEDEHEART). For all questions (NBHW and SWEDEHEART), there was a high degree of misclassification (congruency 12-30%) affecting the agreement (0.09-0.32) between self-report and accelerometer assessed time. The SED-GIH, PA-index and SWEDEHEART-VPA had the strongest sensitivity for identifying individuals with high SED (0.72) or low PA (0.77 and 0.75).

CONCLUSION

The studied PA and SED questions may provide an indication of PA and SED level among patients with MI in clinical practice and could be used to form a basis for further dialogue and assessment. Further development is needed, since practical assessment tools of PA and SED are desirable.

Evaluating a multi-component intervention to reduce and break up office workers' sitting with sit-stand desks using the APEASE criteria

Objective

Sedentary workplace interventions have had success in reducing excessive sitting time in office workers, but barriers to implementation and uptake remain. This study formally assessed a theory-derived, sit-stand desk intervention using the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, Equity) criteria.

Methods

Thirteen adults (eight female, mean age 38 ± 10 years) from the treatment arm of a sedentary behaviour intervention participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic codes were inductively assigned to data items followed by deductive charting using the APEASE criteria.

Results

The intervention was highly acceptable, practicable, safe to deploy, and helped workers reduce workplace sitting time, though individual preferences and workload mediated engagement. Affordability of sit-stand desks and Equity of access were potential barriers to uptake.

Conclusions

Through the lens of the APEASE criteria, this theory-derived, multi-component sit-stand desk intervention showed acceptability, practicability and effectiveness in reducing and breaking up sedentary time at work with minimal side effects. Using this approach with further tailoring and personalisation may help workers achieve greater reductions in workplace sitting, though affordability and equity should be considered further.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-12794-w.

Sedentary Behavior in U.S. Adults: Fall 2019

PURPOSE

Higher levels of sedentary behavior are associated with early mortality, but the distribution of sedentary time by classes of behavior and demographic groups is poorly described in U.S. adults. To quantify the amount and sources of sedentary time in U.S. adults, we conducted a nationwide survey using a novel validated self-administered previous-day recall method and compared these values with a commonly used sitting time question.

METHODS

Participants from the AmeriSpeak panel 20 to 75 yr of age (N = 2640) completed up to two activities completed over time in 24 h (ACT24) previous-day recalls. Recalls were conducted on randomly selected days in October and November 2019. Survey sample designs were applied to reflect the U.S. population.

RESULTS

Mean age was 45.3 yr, 51% were female, 67% non-Hispanic White, and 37% had a body mass index of ≥30 kg·m-2. U.S. adults reported a mean 9.5 h·d-1 of sedentary time (95% confidence interval = 9.4, 9.7 h·d-1), which was 34% more than reported using a common surveillance measure (P < 0.01). Most daily sedentary time was accumulated in the leisure and work life domains, with leisure accounting for 47% (4.3 h·d-1, 95% confidence interval = 4.2, 4.5 h·d-1) of the total sedentary time. Eighty-two percent of leisure time was spent sedentary, mainly watching television/videos or engaged in Internet/computer use.

CONCLUSIONS

U.S. adults appear to spend more time in sedentary behavior than previously thought, and the majority of this time is accumulated at work and in leisure time. Reducing sedentary screen time during leisure in favor of physically active could be an important intervention target in the effort to increase physical activity in U.S. adults.

Perceived influences on reducing prolonged sitting in police staff: a qualitative investigation using the Theoretical Domains Framework and COM-B model

Background

Workplace interventions have shown promise for reducing sitting in office workers. Police office staff remain an understudied population group that work within a disciplined organisation with distinctive work tasks around public safety, potentially affecting their capability, opportunity, and motivation to change sitting behaviour. This study aimed to assess the perceived influences on reducing workplace sitting in non-operational, desk-based police staff in order to derive theoretical determinants for behaviour change.

Methods

Ten police staff from a single police force in Bedfordshire, England [eight female; 39.5 ± 11.5 years] took part in face-to-face semi-structured interviews lasting 46 ± 11 min on average. Thematic analysis identified key themes which were then mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and linked to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model.

Results

Seven themes were identified: ‘Work tasks are seated’, ‘Social norm is to sit’, ‘Belief in ability to regulate behaviour’, ‘Knowledge of health risks’, ‘Organisational support’, ‘Impact on productivity’, and ‘Perceived autonomy for sitting reduction’.

Conclusions

Awareness of behaviour and health impacts (Capability), social and physical support to sit less (Opportunity), and habit formation techniques (Motivation) are recommended considerations in sitting reduction workplace interventions for police staff.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-12019-6.

The context matters - not all prolonged sitting bouts are equally related to momentary affective states: an ambulatory assessment with sedentary-triggered E-diaries

Background

Sedentary behaviors (SB) and especially prolonged sitting bouts are highly prevalent in daily life and studies indicated an association with an increased risk for several non-communicable diseases. Consequently, guidelines to reduce SB were developed. At the same time, an in-depth knowledge regarding SB such as where, what and with whom people spend time sedentary as well as correlates such as affective states of prolonged sitting bouts, is still lacking. A more differentiated view on SB is necessary to identify detrimental and modifiable sedentary bouts. We addressed this gap by conducting an ambulatory assessment study including accelerometer and sedentary-triggered e-diaries that captures data during prolonged sitting bouts (> 20 min). We investigated how contextual factors of prolonged sitting bouts are associated with momentary affective states.

Method

Four studies were combined with a final sample of 308 participants (50.3% female, M_age, 27.4, range, 17–66). SB was assessed objectively with thigh-worn accelerometers for four to five days. Whenever a participant was sitting for 20 or 30 min the accelerometer triggered questions assessing social (not alone vs. alone) and environmental (leisure vs. working) factors as well as momentary affective states (valence, energetic arousal and calmness). Multilevel analyses were used to examine within-person associations between different contexts and mood during prolonged sitting.

Results

Momentary affective states varied significantly due to different social and environmental contexts (p_s < 0.001): Sitting together with others was associated with higher levels of valence and energetic arousal. Furthermore, sitting during leisure time was associated with higher levels of valence and calmness and lower levels of energetic arousal. Significant interaction analyses revealed that participants had the highest ratings while sitting during leisure episodes together with others.

Conclusion

Findings showed that prolonged sitting bouts differ regarding their association with affect. Sitting with others, sitting during leisure time and especially sitting during leisure time and with others, was associated with higher levels of momentary affective states, respectively. Thus, SB guidelines should focus on reducing those SB episodes that are associated with lower levels of affect, for example during working episodes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12966-021-01170-3.

Sitting Time, Type, and Context Among Long-Term Weight-Loss Maintainers

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate sitting time, the home sedentary environment, and physical activity among weight-loss maintainers in WW (formerly Weight Watchers).

METHODS

Participants were 4,305 weight-loss maintainers who had maintained ≥9.1 kg of weight loss (24.7 kg on average) for 3.3 years and had an average current BMI of 27.6 kg/m² . A control group of weight-stable individuals with obesity (n = 619) had an average BMI of 38.9 kg/m² . The Multicontext Sitting Time Questionnaire and Paffenbarger physical activity questionnaire were administered.

RESULTS

Weight-loss maintainers versus controls spent 3 hours less per day sitting during the week (10.9 vs. 13.9; η p 2 = 0.039; P = 0.0001) and weekends (9.7 vs. 12.6; η p 2 = 0.038). Weight-loss maintainers versus controls spent 1 hour less per day in non-work-related sitting using a computer or video games during the week (1.4 vs. 2.3; η p 2 = 0.03; P = 0.0001) and weekends (1.5 vs. 2.5; η p 2 = 0.03; P = 0.0001). Weight-loss maintainers versus controls had similar numbers of sedentary-promoting devices (15.8 vs. 14.8) and expended significantly more calories per week in physical activity (1,835 vs. 785; η p 2 = 0.036; P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Weight-loss maintainers reported less time sitting than weight-stable individuals with obesity. Future research should test the efficacy of targeting sitting time to help promote long-term weight-loss maintenance.

A Comparison of Associations Between Self-Reported and Device-Based Sedentary Behavior and Obesity Markers in Adults: A Multi-National Cross-Sectional Study

The purpose of this study was to examine the associations between self-reported and device-based measures of sedentary behavior (SB) with obesity markers in adults from Latin American countries. Sitting time and total time spent in different SBs were self-reported using two different questionnaires. Accelerometers were used to assess total sedentary time. Body mass index, waist, and neck circumferences were assessed. The highest self-reported sitting time was in Argentina, the highest total time spent in different SBs was in Brazil and Costa Rica, and the highest device-based sedentary time was observed in Peru. Neither self-reported sitting time, total time spent in different SBs or device-based sedentary time were associated with body mass index. Device-based sedentary time was positively associated with waist circumference and self-reported sitting time was positively associated with neck circumference. Caution is warranted when comparing the associations of self-reported and device-based assessments of SB with anthropometric variables.

The effect of a consumer-based activity tracker intervention on accelerometer-measured sedentary time among retirees: a randomized controlled REACT trial

Background

Effective strategies to reverse the increasing trend of sedentary behavior after retirement are needed. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of 12-month activity tracker-based intervention on daily total and prolonged sedentary time (≥60 minutes) among recent retirees.

Methods

Randomization to intervention and control groups was performed to 231 retirees (mean age 65.2 [SD 1.1] years, 83% women). Intervention participants wore a consumer-based wrist-worn activity tracker (Polar Loop 2, Polar, Kempele, Finland), including daily activity goal, every day and night for 12 months. The activity tracker also gave vibrating reminders to break up uninterrupted inactivity periods after 55 minutes. A wrist-worn triaxial ActiGraph wGT3X-BT accelerometer was used to measure sedentary time at baseline and at 3-, 6-, and 12-month time points.

Results

The use of an activity tracker did not reduce daily total or prolonged sedentary time over 12 months (p values for time * group interaction 0.39 and 0.27, respectively). In the post hoc analysis focusing on short- and medium-term effects on prolonged sedentary time, no differences between the intervention and control groups over 3 months were found, but a tendency for a greater decrease in prolonged sedentary time in the intervention group over 6 months was seen (mean difference in changes between the groups 29 minutes, 95% CI −2 to 61).

Conclusions

The activity tracker with inactivity alerts did not elicit changes in sedentary time over 12 months among recent retirees. Alternative approaches may be needed to achieve long-term changes in sedentary time among retirees.

Clinical Trials registration Number: NCT03320746

The effectiveness of sedentary behaviour interventions on sitting time and screen time in children and adults: an umbrella review of systematic reviews

Background

There is increasing concern about the time people spend in sedentary behaviour, including screen time, leisure and occupational sitting. The number of both primary research studies (published trials) and reviews has been growing rapidly in this research area. A summary of the highest level of evidence that provides a broader quantitative synthesis of diverse types of interventions is needed. This research is to articulate the evidence of efficacy of sedentary behaviour interventions to inform interventions to reduce sitting time. The umbrella review, therefore, synthesised systematic reviews that conducted meta-analyses of interventions aiming at reducing sedentary behaviour outcomes across all age group and settings.

Method

A systematic search was conducted on six databases (MEDLINE Complete, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Global Health via EBSCOhost platform, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Systematic Reviews). Included articles were systematic reviews with meta-analysis of interventions aiming at reducing sedentary behaviour (screen time, sitting time or sedentary time) in the general population across all age group.

Results

Seventeen reviews met the inclusion criteria (7 in children and adolescent, 10 in adults). All reviews of sedentary behaviour interventions in children and adolescents investigated intervention effectiveness in reducing screen time. Six out of 11 meta-analyses (reported in 7 reviews) showed small but significant changes in viewing time. All reviews of sedentary behaviour interventions in office workplaces indicated substantial reduction in occupational sitting time (range: 39.6 to 100 min per 8-h workday). Sub-group analyses reported a trend favouring environmental change components such as sit-stand desks, active permissive workstations etc. Meta-analyses indicated that sedentary behaviour interventions were superior to physical activity alone interventions or combined physical activity and sedentary behaviour interventions in reducing sitting time.

Conclusion

The current systematic reviews and meta-analyses supported sedentary behaviour interventions for reducing occupational sitting time in particular, with small changes seen in screen time in children and adolescents. Future research should explore approaches to maintaining behaviour change beyond the intervention period and investigate the potential of sedentary behaviour reduction interventions in older age groups in non-occupational settings.

Automaticity facets applied to screen-time sedentary behaviours and active commuting measured by accelerometers

Background: The time adults spend sitting in front of screens is a health risk factor. In contrast, walking and cycling to and from work, also known as active commuting, could promote physical activity and improve population health.

Objective: This study investigated automatic properties role in explaining active commuting and screen-based sedentary behaviours. The stable, daily conditions for carrying out active commuting and screen-based sedentary behaviour are most likely to develop automatic properties. These characteristics mean performing behaviours via external cues (i.e. lack of intentionality), with an unpleasant emotional experience of not carrying out a set routine (i.e. lack of controllability), and without paying much attention (i.e. efficiency).

Method: This article describes findings of a prospective and correlational study in which 128 people participated. First, participants responded to questions assessed using the Generic Multifaceted Automaticity Scale (GMAS), which measured the automatic properties of screen-based sedentary behaviour and active commuting. The following week, both behaviours were assessed by daily logs to document active commuting and screen-based sedentary behaviour events, and by an accelerometer, worn for seven days, as an objective criterion. Confirmatory factor analyses, bivariate correlations, and multiple linear regressions were computed for the associations between the GMAS scores and objective criterion measures of screen-based sedentary behaviours and active commuting.

Results: Automaticity facets displayed different relationships with screen-based sedentary behaviours and active commuting – people with higher lack of intentionality and lack of controllability for active commuting present higher levels of moderate physical activity. In contrast, the lack of controllability of screen-based sedentary behaviours was a significant predictor of sedentary screen time.

Conclusions: The multidimensional approach to automaticity could be useful in determining more precisely the features that need to be addressed to promote the adoption of active commuting and limit the time spent sitting in front of screens.

Accuracy of Sedentary Behavior-Triggered Ecological Momentary Assessment for Collecting Contextual Information: Development and Feasibility Study

Background

Sedentary behavior has received much attention in the scientific community over the past decade. There is growing evidence that sedentary behavior is negatively associated with physical and mental health. However, an in-depth understanding of the social and environmental context of sedentary behavior is missing. Information about sedentary behavior, such as how everyday sedentary behavior occurs throughout the day (eg, number and length of sedentary bouts), where, when, and with whom it takes place, and what people are doing while being sedentary, is useful to inform the development of interventions aimed at reducing sedentary time. However, examining everyday sedentary behavior requires specific methods.

Objective

The purpose of this paper is (1) to introduce sedentary behavior–triggered Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) as a methodological advancement in the field of sedentary behavior research and (2) to examine the accuracy of sedentary behavior–triggered EMA in 3 different studies in healthy adults. Moreover, we compare the accuracy of sedentary behavior–triggered EMA to simulations of random-trigger designs.

Methods

Sedentary behavior–triggered EMA comprises a continuous assessment of sedentary behavior via accelerometers and repeated contextual assessments via electronic diaries (ie, an application on a smartphone). More specifically, the accelerometer analyzes and transfers data regarding body position (a sitting or lying position, or an upright position) via Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) to a smartphone in real time and triggers the deployment of questionnaires. Each time a participant spends a specified time (eg, 20 minutes) in a sedentary position, the e-diary triggers contextual assessments. To test the accuracy of this method, we calculated a percentage score for all triggered prompts in relation to the total number of bouts that could trigger a prompt.

Results

Based on the accelerometer recordings, 29.3% (5062/17278) of all sedentary bouts were classified as moderate-to-long (20-40 minutes) and long bouts (≥ 41 minutes). On average, the accuracy by participant was 82.77% (3339/4034; SD 21.01%, range 71.00-88.22%) on the study level. Compared to simulations of random prompts (every 120 minutes), the number of triggered prompts was up to 47.9% (n=704) higher through the sedentary behavior–triggered EMA approach. Nearly 40% (799/2001) of all prolonged sedentary bouts (≥ 20 minutes) occurred during work, and in 57% (1140/2001) of all bouts, the participants were not alone.

Conclusions

Sedentary behavior–triggered EMA is an accurate method for collecting contextual information on sedentary behavior in daily life. Given the growing interest in sedentary behavior research, this sophisticated approach offers a real advancement as it can be used to collect social and environmental contextual information or to unravel dynamic associations. Furthermore, it can be modified to develop sedentary behavior–triggered mHealth interventions.

Worldwide surveillance of self-reported sitting time: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Prolonged sitting time is a risk factor for chronic disease, yet recent global surveillance is not well described. The aims were to clarify: (i) the countries that have collected country-level data on self-reported sitting time; (ii) the single-item tools used to collect these data; and (iii) the duration of sitting time reported across low- to high-income countries.

METHODS

Country-level data collected within the last 10 years using single-item self-report were included. The six-stage methodology: (1) reviewing Global Observatory for Physical Activity! Country Cards; (2-4) country-specific searches of PubMed, the Demographic and Health Survey website and Google; (5) analysing the Eurobarometer 88.4; and (6) country-specific searches for World Health Organization STEPwise reports.

RESULTS

A total of 7641 records were identified and screened for eligibility. Sixty-two countries (29%) reported sitting time representing 47% of the global adult population. The majority of data were from high-income (61%) and middle income (29%) countries. The tools used were the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ; n = 34), a modified IPAQ (n = 1) or the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ; n = 27). The median of mean daily sitting times was 4.7 (IQR: 3.5-5.1) hours across all countries. Higher-income countries recorded a longer duration of sitting time than lower-income countries (4.9 vs 2.7 h).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an updated collation of countries collecting self-reported sitting time data. The daily sitting time findings should be interpreted cautiously. Current surveillance of sitting time is limited by a lack of coverage. Measures of population sitting time that are valid, feasible and sensitive to change should be embedded within global surveillance systems, to help guide future policy, research and practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

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.

Associations between self-efficacy and sedentary behaviour: a meta-analysis

Objective: The study sought to synthesize research on the relationship between time spent engaged in sedentary behaviours (SB) and self-efficacy. Analyses investigated whether such associations are moderated by age, conceptualization of self-efficacy, conceptualization of SB, and/or SB measurement.Design and Main Outcome Measures: The review was registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42018086899). Studies including associations between self-efficacy and SB were identified through a systematic search of six databases. Inclusion criteria were met by k = 26 original studies.Results: A random effect meta-analysis showed that higher levels of self-efficacy were associated with lower levels of SB (r = -.158, 95% CI [-.220, -.094]). Moderator analyses indicated that associations between self-efficacy and SB may be similar in strength across age groups, the conceptualizations of self-efficacy or SB and SB measurements.Conclusion: The findings provide preliminary guidance for future interventions targeting reduction of SB, although more longitudinal research is needed to draw causal inferences.

Changing Sedentary Behavior in the Office: A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing the Effect of Affective, Instrumental, and Self-Regulatory Messaging on Sitting

BACKGROUND

Although avoiding sedentary behavior has many health benefits, adults often sit for long periods at work. The purpose of this study was to compare affective attitude, instrumental attitude, and self-regulation messaging interventions on sitting in the workplace.

METHODS

Using a cluster randomised controlled trial design, participants (N = 116) were assigned (by workplace) to: (a) instrumental, (b) affective, (c) self-regulation, or (d) control (nutrition information) groups. Measurements were taken online at baseline, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 12 weeks post-baseline. The interventions comprised three presentations delivered following baseline, week 4, and week 8 assessments. The primary outcome was self-reported average hours of sitting per day at work (registered trial number: NCT04082624).

RESULTS

Controlling for baseline sitting, overall, the affective group sat for less time than the instrumental and self-regulation groups. Also, at week 4, the affective group sat for less time than the instrumental and self-regulation groups and, at week 8, the affective group sat for less time than the self-regulation and control groups. There were no differences between the groups at week 12.

CONCLUSIONS

This investigation showed that workplace interventions targeting affective attitude can lead to less sitting time in the short term. Future research should explore additional strategies to minimise sedentary behavior in the long term.

The SED-GIH: A Single-Item Question for Assessment of Stationary Behavior-A Study of Concurrent and Convergent Validity

The unfavorable health consequences of prolonged time spent sedentary (stationary) make accurate assessment in the general population important. However, for many existing questionnaires, validity for identifying stationary time has not been shown or has shown low validity. This study aimed to assess the concurrent and convergent validity of the GIH stationary single-item question (SED-GIH). Data were obtained in 2013 and 2014 from two Swedish cohorts. A total of 711 men and women provided valid accelerometer data (Actigraph GT3X+) and were included for concurrent validity analyses. A total of 560 individuals answered three additional commonly used sedentary questions, and were included for convergent validity analysis. The SED-GIH displayed a significant correlation with total stationary time (r_s = 0.48) and time in prolonged stationary time (r_s = 0.44). The ROC analysis showed an AUC of 0.72 for identifying individuals with stationary time over 600 min/day. The SED-GIH correlated significantly with other previously used questions (r = 0.72-0.89). The SED-GIH single-item question showed a relatively high agreement with device-assessed stationary behavior and was able to identify individuals with high levels of stationary time. Thus, the SED-GIH may be used to assess total and prolonged stationary time. This has important implications, as simple assessment tools of this behavior are needed in public health practice and research.

Temporal features of sitting, standing and stepping changes in a cluster-randomised controlled trial of a workplace sitting-reduction intervention

Background

There is now a body of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce workplace sitting time. However, there has been limited reporting of how such interventions may impact behaviour both during and outside of work. Sitting, standing and stepping changes following a workplace intervention were examined across five timeframes (work time on work days; non-work time on work days; work days; non-work days; overall (i.e. work and non-work time on all days)), and the relationships between changes during and outside of work was assessed.

Methods

The cluster-randomised controlled trial, ‘Stand Up Victoria’, delivered a multi-component workplace-delivered intervention that successfully reduced workplace and overall sitting time (relative to controls). Separately, over the five timeframes, changes in device (activPAL3)-assessed outcomes — sitting; prolonged sitting (≥30 min bouts); standing; and, stepping — were compared between intervention (n = 114) and controls (n = 84), along with the time-course of sitting changes during work hours, using mixed models. The potential relationships of changes during work with changes outside of work were examined using compositional data analysis.

Results

On workdays, intervention participants significantly (p < 0.05) improved their activity profile relative to controls, with reduced sitting (− 117 min/8-h workday, 95% CI: − 141, − 93) and prolonged sitting (− 77 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: − 101, − 52); increased standing (114 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: 92, 136) and maintenance of stepping (3 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: − 7, 11, p = 0.576). Effects were nearly identical for time at work; similar but slightly weaker for overall; and, small and non-significant outside of work on workdays and non-work days. Improvements occurred at all times, but not equally, during work hours (p < 0.001). Correlations between changes during and outside of work on workdays were very weak in both the intervention group (r = − 0.07) and controls (r = − 0.09).

Conclusions

Sitting time was reduced almost exclusively during work hours (via replacement with standing), with reductions evident during all working hours, to varying degrees. There was no evidence of compensation, with minimal change in activity outside of work, in response to changes in activity at work. Future interventions may benefit from exploring how best to elicit change throughout the whole day, and across work and non-work domains.

Trial registration

This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials register (ACTRN12611000742976) on 15 July 2011