9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

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

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references36

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Reaching the parts other methods cannot reach: an introduction to qualitative methods in health and health services research.

          C Pope, N Mays (1995)
          Qualitative research methods have a long history in the social sciences and deserve to be an essential component in health and health services research. Qualitative and quantitative approaches to research tend to be portrayed as antithetical; the aim of this series of papers is to show the value of a range of qualitative techniques and how they can complement quantitative research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Sitting patterns at work: objective measurement of adherence to current recommendations

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

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

              Abstract 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<0.001) and six months (−64.40 min/workday, −97.31 to −31.50, P<0.001) and daily sitting time at six months (−59.32 min/day, −88.40 to −30.25, P<0.001) and 12 months (−82.39 min/day, −114.54 to −50.26, P=0.001). Group differences (in favour of the intervention group compared with control) were found for prolonged sitting time, standing time, job performance, work engagement, occupational fatigue, sickness presenteeism, daily anxiety, and quality of life. No differences were seen for sickness absenteeism. 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.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                28 July 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 7
                : e0236582
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [2 ] Arbo Unie, Occupational Health Service, Utrecht, The Netherlands
                Teesside University/Qatar Metabolic Institute, UNITED KINGDOM
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: We would like to up-date our competing interest statement as follows: One of the authors (ES) is affiliated with a commercial occupational health service (ArboUnie). ArboUnie provided time to work on this manuscript and paid the salary of this coauthor (ES). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. Furthermore, the authors have declared that no competing interests exists.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0892-4358
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4672-9062
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3719-5249
                Article
                PONE-D-20-01975
                10.1371/journal.pone.0236582
                7386596
                32722696
                195723c4-8217-43af-b5a6-983e91b8c834
                © 2020 Renaud et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 22 January 2020
                : 8 July 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 1, Pages: 20
                Funding
                Funded by: ArboUnie (NL)
                Award Recipient :
                One of the authors (ES) is affiliated with a commercial occupational health service (ArboUnie). The funder provided support in the form of salaries for the author [ES], but did not have any additional role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. The specific role of this author is articulated in the ‘author contributions’ section.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Physical Activity
                Social Sciences
                Economics
                Labor Economics
                Employment
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Medical Risk Factors
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Public and Occupational Health
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Sedentary Behavior
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Sedentary Behavior
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Qualitative Studies
                Computer and Information Sciences
                Software Engineering
                Computer Software
                Engineering and Technology
                Software Engineering
                Computer Software
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Habits
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Habits
                Custom metadata
                Data for this research consists of transcripts of group interviews, which contain identifying information. Participants in this study did not consent to make their data publicly available and in line with privacy regulations, publication is forbidden by our data protection officer at Amsterdam UMC. Anonymized selections from the transcripts can be made available upon request, to qualified researchers. Such requests can be addressed to SPH@ 123456vumc.nl .

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article