Self-reported actual and desired proportion of sitting, standing, walking and physically demanding tasks of office employees in the workplace setting: do they fit together?

Home office shift and sedentary behaviour in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic: descriptives and related socioecological correlates

COVID-19 working restrictions resulted in a location shift of white-collar workers into their home office (HO). Little is known about how the proportion of HO affects sitting and physical activity (PA) behaviour during working hours, and potential correlates are not well understood. A cross-sectional sample of currently working adults in HO (n = 575) completed questionnaires regarding HO proportion before and during the pandemic, work-related sitting and PA, and socioecological factors regarding HO sitting time. The reported HO proportion increased by 46.7 ± 40.6% during COVID-19 working restrictions. Workday sitting proportion correlates positively with HO proportion. The regression model identified gender, education level, working hours, working environment to stand during work, and transport and leisure PA as correlates of the workday sitting proportion in HO. This study provides findings that high HO proportions are related to higher work-related sitting times and adds insights into possible correlates of sitting time in HO.Practitioner summary: Working in the home office (HO) is a common characteristic of flexible work in white-collar workers. This study found that the workday sitting proportion correlates positively with HO proportion and identified correlates of the workday sitting in HO. Practitioners should consider the potential impacts of HO on work-related sedentary behaviour in future workplace health promotion.

[Work-related sedentary behavior]

Background

Sedentary behavior is associated with an increased risk of chronic diseases, such as metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes and all-cause mortality. Occupational sitting time contributes to large amounts of daily sedentary behavior, especially in office workers.

Objective

This study investigated the amount of time spent in sedentary behavior during different tasks at work and while commuting of administrative personnel of a university hospital in Germany.

Material and methods

A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study of administrative employees at the University Hospital Regensburg, Germany was carried out to assess work-related sedentary behavior. Descriptive and exploratory statistical analyses were performed.

Results

The study population consisted of 159 participants (54.1% women, 51.6% older than 40 years), which corresponds to a response rate of 26%. The median daily sitting time in the office was 7.0 h (interquartile range, IQR 6.0-7.5 h) and mostly occurred during computer work (57.3%), telephone calls (13.2%) and meetings (11.7%). Median standing time at work was 0.8 h (IQR 0.3-1.4 h). Administrative staff spent a median of 0.7 h (IQR 0.3-1.0 h) per day sedentary while commuting, with 67.3% of respondents commuting by car, motorbike or scooter. The participants were of the opinion that sitting for long uninterrupted periods had negative (69.6%) or relatively negative (29.7%) effects on health.

Conclusion

Administrative staff in hospitals spend large amounts of the daily working time with sedentary behavior. Interventions that enable working both in sitting and standing positions can lead to reduced work-related sitting time and thereby could improve occupational and, in a broader sense, public health.

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.

Type and intensity distribution of structured and incidental lifestyle physical activity of students and office workers: a retrospective content analysis

Background

Physical activity (PA) guidelines acknowledge the health benefits of regular moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) regardless of bout duration. However, little knowledge exists concerning the type and intensity distribution of structured and incidental lifestyle PA of students and office workers. The present study aimed to i) assess the duration and distribution of intensity of MVPAs during waking hours ≥50% of heart rate reserve (HRR), ii) to identify the type of PA through diary assessment, iii) to assign these activities into structured and lifestyle incidental PA, and iv) to compare this information between students and office workers.

Methods

Twenty-three healthy participants (11 students, 12 office workers) recorded heart rate (HR) with a wrist-worn HR monitor (Polar M600) and filled out a PA diary throughout seven consecutive days (i.e. ≥ 8 waking h/day). Relative HR zones were calculated, and PA diary information was coded using the Compendium of PA. We matched HR data with the reported PA and identified PA bouts during waking time ≥ 50% HRR concerning duration, HRR zone, type of PA, and assigned each activity to incidental and structured PA. Descriptive measures for time spend in different HRR zones and differences between students and office workers were calculated.

Results

In total, we analyzed 276.894 s (76 h 54 min 54 s) of waking time in HRR zones ≥50% and identified 169 different types of PA. The participants spend 31.9 ± 27.1 min/day or 3.9 ± 3.2% of their waking time in zones of ≥50% HRR with no difference between students and office workers (p > 0.01). The proportion of assigned incidental lifestyle PA was 76.9 ± 22.5%.

Conclusions

The present study provides initial insights regarding the type, amount, and distribution of intensity of structured and incidental lifestyle PA ≥ 50% HRR. Findings show a substantial amount of incidental lifestyle PA during waking hours and display the importance of promoting a physically active lifestyle. Future research could employ ambulatory assessments with integrated electronic diaries to detect information on the type and context of MVPA during the day.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-022-12999-z.

Effect of Workstation Type on the Relationship Between Fatigue, Physical Activity, Stress, and Sleep

OBJECTIVE

This study examined office workstation types' impact on the relationship between fatigue and three health metrics: physical activity, stress, and sleep quality.

METHODS

Data from 225 office workers were collected for perceived fatigue, perceived sleep quality (Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index [PSQI]), physiological stress response (standard deviation of heart rate variability [HRV]), and physical activity (total activity in minutes) during three consecutive workdays. Stress and physical activity were measured using chest-worn sensors. Workers were then categorized as tired or not-tired based on the median of the fatigue rating.

RESULTS

Among tired workers, open-bench seating workers had increased physical activity, improved sleep quality, and reduced stress compared with workers in private offices and cubicles.

CONCLUSIONS

Office workstation types influence physical activity and levels of stress during work hours, which in turn affect sleep quality.

The effect of sit-stand schedules on office work productivity: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Sit-stand workstations have been introduced in the workplaces to address the adverse sedentary effect inherent to typical office jobs. Existing field or laboratory studies showed that standing interventions are not a detriment to work productivity or performance. The effect of gradient standing proportion on these measures is still unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The current naturalistic pilot study aimed to examine the controlled sit-stand ratio effect on office performances.

METHODS

Eleven musculoskeletal symptom free office employees from a large government agency volunteered in this study. They were all equipped with electronic sit-stand desks. Computer usage (N=11) and productivity (N=3) were collected using software and organizational metrics, respectively, for four typical workdays of four different sit-stand ratios (7 : 1, 3 : 1, 2 : 1, and 1 : 1).

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant schedule effects on any computer usage measures. While not significant, time using computer, keystrokes, word count, and keyboard errors were all less as standing time increased. Sit-stand ratio and job productivity did not observe a clear cause and effect relationship.

CONCLUSIONS

The amount of time spent standing in typical office jobs might not affect computer usage and productivity. Further study with a larger sample is needed for a stronger evidence.

Who Uses Action Planning in a Web-Based Computer-Tailored Intervention to Reduce Workplace Sitting and What do Action Plans Look Like? Analyses of the Start to stand Intervention among Flemish Employees

BACKGROUND

Action planning plays an important role in many web-based behaviour change interventions. As such, it is important to identify who engages in action planning and what action plans look like. This study examines (1) attributes of users creating an action plan and (2) the content of action plans made during a web-based intervention to reduce workplace sitting.

METHODS

Users answered "what" (short standing breaks and/or longer periods of standing), "when" (working hours, work breaks, commuting), "where" (workplace, transport mode), and "how" (frequency, duration, implementation intentions) questions. MANOVA and chi-squared tests were conducted to compare those creating an action plan with those who did not. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the content of the action plans.

RESULTS

Those creating an action plan (n = 236/1,701) were significantly older, more sedentary at work, and more aware of health risks related to excessive sitting compared to those not planning (n = 1,465). The majority planned standing breaks (n = 212) every 30 minutes, and periods of standing (n = 173) for 1 to 2 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Future interventions should promote action planning more, especially among younger employees and those with less health-related knowledge about sitting. Action plans were compatible with current sitting messages used in health promotion.

Moving to an "Active" Biophilic Designed Office Workplace: A Pilot Study about the Effects on Sitting Time and Sitting Habits of Office-Based Workers

Promising initial insights show that offices designed to permit physical activity (PA) may reduce workplace sitting time. Biophilic approaches are intended to introduce natural surroundings into the workplace, and preliminary data show positive effects on stress reduction and elevated productivity within the workplace. The primary aim of this pilot study was to analyze changes in workplace sitting time and self-reported habit strength concerning uninterrupted sitting and PA during work, when relocating from a traditional office setting to “active” biophilic-designed surroundings. The secondary aim was to assess possible changes in work-associated factors such as satisfaction with the office environment, work engagement, and work performance, among office staff. In a pre-post designed field study, we collected data through an online survey on health behavior at work. Twelve participants completed the survey before (one-month pre-relocation, T₁) and twice after the office relocation (three months (T₂) and seven months post-relocation (T₃)). Standing time per day during office hours increased from T₁ to T₃ by about 40 min per day (p < 0.01). Other outcomes remained unaltered. The results suggest that changing office surroundings to an active-permissive biophilic design increased standing time during working hours. Future larger-scale controlled studies are warranted to investigate the influence of office design on sitting time and work-associated factors during working hours in depth.

Prolonged Sitting Interrupted by 6-Min of High-Intensity Exercise: Circulatory, Metabolic, Hormonal, Thermal, Cognitive, and Perceptual Responses

The aim was to examine certain aspects of circulatory, metabolic, hormonal, thermoregulatory, cognitive, and perceptual responses while sitting following a brief session of high-intensity interval exercise. Twelve students (five men; age, 22 ± 2 years) performed two trials involving either simply sitting for 180 min (SIT) or sitting for this same period with a 6-min session of high-intensity exercise after 60 min (SIT+HIIT). At T₀ (after 30 min of resting), T₁ (after a 20-min breakfast), T₂ (after sitting for 1 h), T₃ (immediately after the HIIT), T₄, T₅, T₆, and T₇ (30, 60, 90, and 120 min after the HIIT), circulatory, metabolic, hormonal, thermoregulatory, cognitive, and perceptual responses were assessed. The blood lactate concentration (at T₃-T₅), heart rate (at T₃-T₆), oxygen uptake (at T₃-T₇), respiratory exchange ratio, and sensations of heat (T₃-T₅), sweating (T₃, T₄) and odor (T₃), as well as perception of vigor (T₃-T₆), were higher and the respiratory exchange ratio (T₄-T₇) and mean body and skin temperatures (T₃) lower in the SIT+HIIT than the SIT trial. Levels of blood glucose and salivary cortisol, cerebral oxygenation, and feelings of anxiety/depression, fatigue or hostility, as well as the variables of cognitive function assessed by the Stroop test did not differ between SIT and SIT+HIIT. In conclusion, interruption of prolonged sitting with a 6-min session of HIIT induced more pronounced circulatory and metabolic responses and improved certain aspects of perception, without affecting selected hormonal, thermoregulatory or cognitive functions.