Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN), School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Australia.
School of Psychology, Deakin University, Australia.
J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Jul;21(7):697-701. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.10.030. Epub 2017 Nov 7.
Prolonged sitting is a health risk factor which is ubiquitous to the workplace, and breaking up prolonged sitting is widely recommended. This study evaluated the test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of a self-report measure of duration of sitting and breaks from sitting in the workplace.
Cross-sectional study.
Fifty-nine workers who reported spending most of their work time sitting wore an activPAL inclinometer and the ActiGraph accelerometer for eight consecutive days, and completed single-item measures of duration of sitting (min/work hour) and breaks from sitting (frequency/per work hour), twice, seven days apart.
Participants reported sitting at work for a median of 420min/day (Interquartile Range=360-450min/day) and taking one break (Interquartile Range=1.0-2.0) from sitting per work hour. For reported duration of workplace sitting, test-retest reliability was adequate (Intra-Class Correlations=0.78, 95% Confidence Intervals [CI]=0.65, 0.86), and concurrent validity fair against the activPAL (Spearman's Rho=0.24, CI-1.0,0.47) and the ActiGraph (Rho=0.39, CI=0.15, 0.68). For reported breaks from sitting (frequency/per work hour), test-retest reliability was adequate (Intra-Class Correlations=0.65, CI=0.48, 0.78) and concurrent validity fair against the activPAL (Spearman's Rho=0.39, CI=0.25, 0.74) and the ActiGraph (Spearman's Rho=0.30, CI=0.15, 0.69). Self-reported duration of sitting was biased toward over-reporting compared to the activPAL (median=45.4min) and under-reporting compared to the ActiGraph (median=21.7min).
This study found adequate reliability and fair validity for self-reported duration of sitting (min/work day) and breaks from sitting (frequency/per work hour). Further validity research is needed using the inclinometer.
久坐是一种普遍存在于工作场所的健康风险因素，广泛建议打破久坐习惯。本研究评估了一种自我报告的工作中久坐时间和休息时间的测量工具的重测信度和同时效度。
横断面研究。
59 名报告大部分工作时间都在坐着的工人佩戴 activPAL 测斜计和 ActiGraph 加速度计连续 8 天，并在相隔 7 天的两次单独测量中报告工作时的久坐时间（min/小时）和休息时间（频率/小时）。
参与者报告每天在工作中坐着的中位数为 420min（四分位距=360-450min），每小时休息一次（四分位距=1.0-2.0 次）。对于报告的工作场所久坐时间，重测信度良好（组内相关系数=0.78，95%置信区间[CI]=0.65，0.86），与 activPAL（Spearman's Rho=0.24，CI=-1.0，0.47）和 ActiGraph（Rho=0.39，CI=0.15，0.68）具有中等同时效度。对于报告的休息时间（频率/小时），重测信度良好（组内相关系数=0.65，CI=0.48，0.78），与 activPAL（Spearman's Rho=0.39，CI=0.25，0.74）和 ActiGraph（Spearman's Rho=0.30，CI=0.15，0.69）具有中等同时效度。与 activPAL（中位数=45.4min）相比，自我报告的久坐时间存在高估，与 ActiGraph（中位数=21.7min）相比存在低估。
本研究发现，自我报告的工作时间（min/工作日）和休息时间（频率/小时）的重测信度良好，同时效度中等。需要进一步使用测斜计进行有效性研究。
