Background
A large number of people are employed in sedentary occupations. Physical inactivity and excessive sitting at workplaces have been linked to increased risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, and all‐cause mortality.

/pdf/workplace-interventions-for-reducing-sitting-at-work-z3xxoyd3e5.pdf

Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work

Objectives To evaluate the impact of a multicomponent intervention (Stand More AT (SMArT) Work) designed to reduce sitting time on short (three months), medium (six months), and longer term (12 months) changes in occupational, daily, and prolonged sitting, standing, and physical activity, and physical, psychological, and work related health. Design Cluster two arm randomised controlled trial. Setting National Health Service trust, England. Participants 37 office clusters (146 participants) of desk based workers: 19 clusters (77 participants) were randomised to the intervention and 18 (69 participants) to control. Interventions The intervention group received a height adjustable workstation, a brief seminar with supporting leaflet, workstation instructions with sitting and standing targets, feedback on sitting and physical activity at three time points, posters, action planning and goal setting booklet, self monitoring and prompt tool, and coaching sessions (month 1 and every three months thereafter). The control group continued with usual practice. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was occupational sitting time (thigh worn accelerometer). Secondary outcomes were objectively measured daily sitting, prolonged sitting (≥30 minutes), and standing time, physical activity, musculoskeletal problems, self reported work related health (job performance, job satisfaction, work engagement, occupational fatigue, sickness presenteeism, and sickness absenteeism), cognitive function, and self reported psychological measures (mood and affective states, quality of life) assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months. Data were analysed using generalised estimating equation models, accounting for clustering. Results A significant difference between groups (in favour of the intervention group) was found in occupational sitting time at 12 months (−83.28 min/workday, 95% confidence interval −116.57 to −49.98, P=0.001). Differences between groups (in favour of the intervention group compared with control) were observed for occupational sitting time at three months (−50.62 min/workday, −78.71 to −22.54, P Conclusions SMArT Work successfully reduced sitting time over the short, medium, and longer term, and positive changes were observed in work related and psychological health. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN10967042.

https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/363/bmj.k3870.full.pdf

Effectiveness of the Stand More AT (SMArT) Work intervention: cluster randomised controlled trial

In the mid-1980s, Heckhausen and Gollwitzer set out to analyze how people control their actions (see Heckhausen, Gollwitzer, & Weinert, 1987). They quickly realized that breaking action control down into different phases greatly benefited its understanding. Heckhausen and Gollwitzer’s analysis was heavily influenced by the work of Kurt Lewin (e.g., Lewin et al., 1944), for whom there was never any doubt that motivational phenomena can only be properly understood and analyzed from an action perspective that distinguishes the processes of goal setting from those of goal striving, an insight that went unheeded for several decades. Accordingly, Heckhausen and Gollwitzer (1987) proposed the “Rubicon”model of action phases, which describes the course of action as a temporal, linear path starting with a person’s wishes or desires and ending with the evaluation of the action outcomes achieved. The model was designed to raise and help answer the following questions: How do people select their goals? How do they plan the execution of goal striving? How do they enact these plans? Moreover, how do they evaluate their accomplishments? According to the Rubicon model, a course of action involves a phase of deliberating the desirability and feasibility of one’s wishes at the outset in order to arrive at a binding decision regarding which of them one wants to pursue as a goal (pre-decisional phase), a phase of planning concrete strategies for achieving this goal Practical Summary

Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases

The Handbook of Behaviour Change

NHMRC: 1057608, 1078360, 569940, 1003960, 1086029, 1057608
Victorian Health Promotion Foundation: 15732
National Breast Cancer Foundation

/pdf/feasibility-and-acceptability-of-reducing-workplace-sitting-3krzmz3hzp.pdf

Feasibility and acceptability of reducing workplace sitting time: a qualitative study with Australian office workers.

PurposeThis study aimed to evaluate the initial and long-term effectiveness of a workplace intervention compared with usual practice, targeting the reduction of sitting on activity outcomes.MethodsOffice worksites (≥1 km apart) from a single organization in Victoria, Australia, were cluster

/pdf/a-cluster-randomized-controlled-trial-to-reduce-office-2e36epiiwg.pdf

Elizabeth G Eakin

Papers

A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial to Reduce Office Workers’ Sitting Time: Effect on Activity Outcomes