Suppr超能文献

减少工作时久坐的职场干预措施。

Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.

作者信息

Shrestha Nipun, Kukkonen-Harjula Katriina T, Verbeek Jos H, Ijaz Sharea, Hermans Veerle, Bhaumik Soumyadeep

机构信息

Health Research and Social Development Forum, Thapathali, Kathmandu, Nepal, 24133.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Mar 17;3(3):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Office work has changed considerably over the previous couple of decades and has become sedentary in nature. Physical inactivity at workplaces and particularly increased sitting has been linked to increase in cardiovascular disease, obesity and overall mortality.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of workplace interventions to reduce sitting at work compared to no intervention or alternative interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, OSH UPDATE, PsycINFO, Clinical trials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal up to 2 June, 2015. We also screened reference lists of articles and contacted authors to find more studies to include.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised controlled trials (cRCTs), and quasi-randomised controlled trials of interventions to reduce sitting at work. For changes of workplace arrangements, we also included controlled before-and-after studies (CBAs) with a concurrent control group. The primary outcome was time spent sitting at work per day, either self-reported or objectively measured by means of an accelerometer-inclinometer. We considered energy expenditure, duration and number of sitting episodes lasting 30 minutes or more, work productivity and adverse events as secondary outcomes.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles, abstracts and full-text articles for study eligibility. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted authors for additional data where required.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 studies, two cross-over RCTs, 11 RCTs, three cRCTs and four CBAs, with a total of 2180 participants from high income nations. The studies evaluated physical workplace changes (nine studies), policy changes (two studies), information and counselling (seven studies) and interventions from multiple categories (two studies). One study had both physical workplace changes and information and counselling components. We did not find any studies that had investigated the effect of periodic breaks or standing or walking meetings. Physical workplace changesA sit-stand desk alone compared to no intervention reduced sitting time at work per workday with between thirty minutes to two hours at short term (up to three months) follow-up (six studies, 218 participants, very low quality evidence). In two studies, sit-stand desks with additional counselling reduced sitting time at work in the same range at short-term follow-up (61 participants, very low quality evidence). One study found a reduction at six months' follow-up of -56 minutes (95% CI -101 to -12, very low quality evidence) compared to no intervention. Also total sitting time at work and outside work decreased with sit-stand desks compared to no intervention (MD -78 minutes, 95% CI -125 to -31, one study) as did the duration of sitting episodes lasting 30 minutes or more (MD -52 minutes, 95% CI -79 to -26, two studies). This is considerably less than the two to four hours recommended by experts. Sit-stand desks did not have a considerable effect on work performance, musculoskeletal symptoms or sick leave. It remains unclear if standing can repair the harms of sitting because there is hardly any extra energy expenditure.The effects of active workstations were inconsistent. Treadmill desks combined with counselling reduced sitting time at work (MD -29 minutes, 95% CI -55 to -2, one study) compared to no intervention at 12 weeks' follow-up. Pedalling workstations combined with information did not reduce inactive sitting at work considerably (MD -12 minutes, 95% CI -24 to 1, one study) compared to information alone at 16 weeks' follow-up. The quality of evidence was low for active workstations. Policy changesTwo studies with 443 participants provided low quality evidence that walking strategies did not have a considerable effect on workplace sitting time at 10 weeks' (MD -16 minutes, 95% CI -54 to 23) or 21 weeks' (MD -17 minutes, 95% CI -58 to 25) follow-up respectively. Information and counsellingCounselling reduced sitting time at work (MD -28 minutes, 95% CI -52 to -5, two studies, low quality evidence) at medium term (three months to 12 months) follow-up. Mindfulness training did not considerably reduce workplace sitting time (MD -2 minutes, 95% CI -22 to 18) at six months' follow-up and at 12 months' follow-up (MD -16 minutes, 95% CI -45 to 12, one study, low quality evidence). There was no considerable increase in work engagement with counselling.There was an inconsistent effect of computer prompting on sitting time at work. One study found no considerable effect on sitting at work (MD -17 minutes, 95% CI -48 to 14, low quality evidence) at 10 days' follow-up, while another study reported a significant reduction in sitting at work (MD -55 minutes, 95% CI -96 to -14, low quality evidence) at 13 weeks' follow-up. Computer prompts to stand reduced sitting at work by 14 minutes more (95% CI 10 to 19, one study) compared to computer prompts to step at six days' follow-up. Computer prompts did not change the number of sitting episodes that last 30 minutes or longer. Interventions from multiple categories Interventions combining multiple categories had an inconsistent effect on sitting time at work, with a reduction in sitting time at 12 weeks' (25 participants, very low quality evidence) and six months' (294 participants, low quality evidence) follow-up in two studies but no considerable effect at 12 months' follow-up in one study (MD -47.98, 95% CI -103 to 7, 294 participants, low quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: At present there is very low to low quality evidence that sit-stand desks may decrease workplace sitting between thirty minutes to two hours per day without having adverse effects at the short or medium term. There is no evidence on the effects in the long term. There were no considerable or inconsistent effects of other interventions such as changing work organisation or information and counselling. There is a need for cluster-randomised trials with a sufficient sample size and long term follow-up to determine the effectiveness of different types of interventions to reduce objectively measured sitting time at work.

摘要

背景

在过去几十年里,办公室工作发生了很大变化,本质上变得久坐不动。工作场所的身体活动不足,尤其是久坐时间增加,与心血管疾病、肥胖和总体死亡率的上升有关。

目的

评估与无干预或其他干预措施相比,工作场所干预措施对减少工作时久坐时间的效果。

检索方法

我们检索了Cochrane对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、职业安全与健康更新数据库(OSH UPDATE)、心理学文摘数据库(PsycINFO)、临床试验.gov以及世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)检索门户,检索截止至2015年6月2日。我们还筛选了文章的参考文献列表,并联系作者以查找更多纳入研究。

选择标准

我们纳入了随机对照试验(RCT)、整群随机对照试验(cRCT)以及减少工作时久坐时间干预措施的半随机对照试验。对于工作场所安排的变化,我们还纳入了有同期对照组的前后对照研究(CBA)。主要结局是每天工作时的久坐时间,可通过自我报告或使用加速度计 - 倾角仪客观测量。我们将能量消耗、持续30分钟或更长时间的久坐时长和次数、工作效率以及不良事件视为次要结局。

数据收集与分析

两位综述作者独立筛选标题、摘要和全文文章以确定研究的纳入资格。两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估偏倚风险。如有需要,我们会联系作者获取额外数据。

主要结果

我们纳入了20项研究,其中两项交叉RCT、11项RCT、三项cRCT和四项CBA,共有来自高收入国家的2180名参与者。这些研究评估了工作场所的物理变化(9项研究)、政策变化(2项研究)、信息与咨询(7项研究)以及多类别干预措施(2项研究)。一项研究同时包含工作场所的物理变化以及信息与咨询成分。我们未发现任何研究调查过定期休息或站立或步行会议的效果。工作场所的物理变化与无干预相比,单独使用升降桌在短期(长达三个月)随访时可使每个工作日的工作时久坐时间减少30分钟至两小时(6项研究,218名参与者,极低质量证据)。在两项研究中,升降桌结合额外咨询在短期随访时可使工作时久坐时间减少相同幅度(61名参与者,极低质量证据)。一项研究发现,与无干预相比,在六个月随访时减少了 -56分钟(95%CI -101至 -12,极低质量证据)。与无干预相比,使用升降桌时工作和工作外的总久坐时间也减少了(MD -78分钟,95%CI -125至 -31,一项研究),持续30分钟或更长时间的久坐时长也减少了(MD -52分钟,95%CI -79至 -26,两项研究)。这远低于专家建议的两到四小时。升降桌对工作表现、肌肉骨骼症状或病假没有显著影响。尚不清楚站立是否能修复久坐的危害,因为几乎没有额外的能量消耗。主动式工作站的效果不一致。与无干预相比,跑步机办公桌结合咨询在12周随访时可减少工作时的久坐时间(MD -29分钟,95%CI -55至 -2,一项研究)。与单独信息相比,蹬踏式工作站结合信息在16周随访时并未显著减少工作时的久坐时间(MD -12分钟,95%CI -24至1,一项研究)。主动式工作站的证据质量较低。政策变化两项共443名参与者的研究提供了低质量证据,表明步行策略在10周(MD -16分钟,95%CI -54至23)或21周(MD -17分钟,95%CI -58至25)随访时对工作场所久坐时间没有显著影响。信息与咨询咨询在中期(三个月至12个月)随访时可减少工作时的久坐时间(MD -28分钟,95%CI -52至 -5,两项研究,低质量证据)。正念训练在六个月随访和12个月随访时并未显著减少工作场所的久坐时间(六个月随访时MD -2分钟,95%CI -22至18;12个月随访时MD -16分钟,95%CI -45至12,一项研究,低质量证据)。咨询对工作投入没有显著增加。计算机提示对工作时久坐时间的影响不一致。一项研究发现在10天随访时对工作时久坐没有显著影响(MD -17分钟,95%CI -48至14,低质量证据),而另一项研究报告在13周随访时工作时久坐显著减少(MD -55分钟,95%CI -96至 -14,低质量证据)。与计算机提示走动相比,计算机提示站立在六天随访时可使工作时久坐减少14分钟更多(95%CI 10至19,一项研究)。计算机提示并未改变持续30分钟或更长时间的久坐次数。多类别干预措施多类别干预措施对工作时久坐时间的影响不一致,两项研究在12周(25名参与者,极低质量证据)和六个月(294名参与者,低质量证据)随访时久坐时间减少,但一项研究在12个月随访时没有显著影响(MD -47.98,95%CI -103至7,294名参与者,低质量证据)。

作者结论

目前,证据质量极低至低,表明升降桌可能会使工作场所的每日久坐时间减少30分钟至两小时,且在短期或中期没有不良影响。尚无长期影响的证据。其他干预措施,如改变工作组织或信息与咨询,没有显著或不一致的效果。需要进行有足够样本量和长期随访的整群随机试验,以确定不同类型干预措施对客观测量的工作时久坐时间减少的有效性。

相似文献

1
Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Mar 17;3(3):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub3.
2
Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 20;6(6):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub4.
3
Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Dec 17;12(12):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub5.
4
Workplace interventions for reducing sitting at work.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 26;1:CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub2.
5
Interventions to prevent occupational noise-induced hearing loss.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 7;7(7):CD006396. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006396.pub4.
6
Optical correction of refractive error for preventing and treating eye symptoms in computer users.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Apr 10;4(4):CD009877. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009877.pub2.
8
Behavioural interventions to promote workers' use of respiratory protective equipment.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Dec 7;12(12):CD010157. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010157.pub2.
10
Transition of care for adolescents from paediatric services to adult health services.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Apr 29;4(4):CD009794. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009794.pub2.

引用本文的文献

2
Evidence-based interventions to prevent sick leave: a scoping review of reviews.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Feb 24;25(1):751. doi: 10.1186/s12889-025-21911-4.
4
National implementation trial of BeUpstanding™: an online initiative for workers to sit less and move more.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2024 Sep 30;21(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s12966-024-01652-0.
6
A-REST (Activity to Reduce Excessive Sitting Time): A Feasibility Trial to Reduce Prolonged Sitting in Police Staff.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jul 27;19(15):9186. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19159186.
9
Alternatives for Measuring Sitting Accumulation in Workplace Surveys.
J Occup Environ Med. 2021 Dec 1;63(12):e853-e860. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000002387.

本文引用的文献

1
Interventions to reduce sedentary behavior and increase physical activity during productive work: a systematic review.
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2016 May 1;42(3):181-191. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3544. Epub 2015 Dec 18.
3
Evaluation of sit-stand workstations in an office setting: a randomised controlled trial.
BMC Public Health. 2015 Nov 19;15:1145. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2469-8.
4
Effects of environmental intervention on sedentary time, musculoskeletal comfort and work ability in office workers.
Eur J Sport Sci. 2016 Sep;16(6):747-54. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2015.1106590. Epub 2015 Nov 3.
6
Using Sit-to-Stand Workstations in Offices: Is There a Compensation Effect?
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2016 Apr;48(4):720-5. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000000802.
7
What is the metabolic and energy cost of sitting, standing and sit/stand transitions?
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2016 Feb;116(2):263-73. doi: 10.1007/s00421-015-3279-5.
8
Comparison of the postural and physiological effects of two dynamic workstations to conventional sitting and standing workstations.
Ergonomics. 2016 Mar;59(3):449-63. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1080861. Epub 2015 Sep 21.
9
How to reduce sitting time? A review of behaviour change strategies used in sedentary behaviour reduction interventions among adults.
Health Psychol Rev. 2016;10(1):89-112. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2015.1082146. Epub 2015 Sep 16.
10
Total Worker Health Intervention Increases Activity of Sedentary Workers.
Am J Prev Med. 2016 Jan;50(1):9-17. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.06.022. Epub 2015 Aug 7.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验