Bopp Melissa, Sims Dangaia, Colgan Joanna, Rovniak Liza, Matthews Stephen A, Poole Erika
Departments of Kinesiology (Dr Bopp and Mss Sims and Colgan) and Sociology and Anthropology (Dr Matthews), The Pennsylvania State University, University Park; Department of Medicine and Public Health Sciences, Pennsylvania State University College of Medicine, Hershey (Dr Rovniak); and College of Information Sciences and Technology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park (Dr Poole).
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2016 Jul-Aug;22(4):387-91. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000337.
Active commuting (AC; walking or biking) to work is associated with many benefits, though rates remain low. Employers can benefit from greater employee AC, through improved employee physical activity, though how the workplace is related to AC is unclear.
The current study sought to examine how the workplace environment is related to AC participation.
This was a cross-sectional, online survey conducted in April-May 2014.
A volunteer sample of university employees (n = 551) was recruited.
A large university in the northeastern United States.
The online survey addressed travel habits, demographics, and workplace social and physical environment for AC. Pearson correlations and t tests were used to examine relationships between the percentage of all trips as AC and workplace influences and a multivariate regression analysis predicted AC participation.
Participants reported 0.86 ± 2.6 AC trips per week. Percentage of trips as AC trips associated with perceived coworker AC (P < .001), parking availability (r = -0.22, P < .001), and bike parking availability (r = 0.24, P < .001). Individuals reporting greater walking time from their parking spot to their workplace reported a higher percentage of trips as AC compared with those with closer parking (P < .001). Individuals with a parking pass were less likely to AC than those with no permit (P < .001). The full multivariate model explained 42.5% of the variance in percentage of trips per week via AC (P < .001), having a parking pass (B = 0.23, P < .001), parking availability (B = -0.17, P < .001), perceived coworkers AC (B = 0.08, P = .02), and greater perceived walk time to campus (B = -0.43, P < .001) as significant predictors.
This study provided insight into institutional influences on AC, indicating that policy, infrastructure, and programmatic initiatives could be used to promote workplace AC.
积极通勤（以步行或骑自行车的方式）上班有诸多益处，不过其比例仍然较低。雇主可通过提高员工的身体活动水平从员工更多的积极通勤中受益，然而工作场所与积极通勤之间的关系尚不明晰。
当前研究旨在探究工作场所环境与积极通勤参与度之间的关系。
这是一项于2014年4月至5月开展的横断面在线调查。
招募了大学员工的志愿者样本（n = 551）。
美国东北部的一所大型大学。
在线调查涉及出行习惯、人口统计学特征以及积极通勤的工作场所社会和物理环境。使用Pearson相关性分析和t检验来检验积极通勤在所有出行中所占百分比与工作场所影响因素之间的关系，并通过多元回归分析预测积极通勤参与度。
参与者报告每周有0.86±2.6次积极通勤出行。积极通勤出行的百分比与同事的积极通勤感知度（P <.001）、停车位可用性（r = -0.22，P <.001）以及自行车停车位可用性（r = 0.24，P <.001）相关。与停车位较近的人相比，报告从停车位到工作场所步行时间更长的人积极通勤出行的百分比更高（P <.001）。有停车证的人积极通勤的可能性低于没有停车证的人（P <.001）。完整的多元模型解释了每周通过积极通勤出行的百分比中42.5%的方差（P <.001），拥有停车证（B = 0.23, P <.001）、停车位可用性（B = -0.17, P <.001）、同事的积极通勤感知度（B = 0.08, P =.02）以及到校园的步行时间更长（B = -0.43, P <.001）是显著的预测因素。
本研究深入了解了机构对积极通勤的影响，表明政策、基础设施和计划性举措可用于促进工作场所的积极通勤。
