School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Herston Road, Herston, Brisbane, QLD, 4006, Australia.
Baker Heart & Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2019 Nov 21;16(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s12966-019-0879-1.
There is now a body of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce workplace sitting time. However, there has been limited reporting of how such interventions may impact behaviour both during and outside of work. Sitting, standing and stepping changes following a workplace intervention were examined across five timeframes (work time on work days; non-work time on work days; work days; non-work days; overall (i.e. work and non-work time on all days)), and the relationships between changes during and outside of work was assessed.
The cluster-randomised controlled trial, 'Stand Up Victoria', delivered a multi-component workplace-delivered intervention that successfully reduced workplace and overall sitting time (relative to controls). Separately, over the five timeframes, changes in device (activPAL3)-assessed outcomes - sitting; prolonged sitting (≥30 min bouts); standing; and, stepping - were compared between intervention (n = 114) and controls (n = 84), along with the time-course of sitting changes during work hours, using mixed models. The potential relationships of changes during work with changes outside of work were examined using compositional data analysis.
On workdays, intervention participants significantly (p < 0.05) improved their activity profile relative to controls, with reduced sitting (- 117 min/8-h workday, 95% CI: - 141, - 93) and prolonged sitting (- 77 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: - 101, - 52); increased standing (114 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: 92, 136) and maintenance of stepping (3 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: - 7, 11, p = 0.576). Effects were nearly identical for time at work; similar but slightly weaker for overall; and, small and non-significant outside of work on workdays and non-work days. Improvements occurred at all times, but not equally, during work hours (p < 0.001). Correlations between changes during and outside of work on workdays were very weak in both the intervention group (r = - 0.07) and controls (r = - 0.09).
Sitting time was reduced almost exclusively during work hours (via replacement with standing), with reductions evident during all working hours, to varying degrees. There was no evidence of compensation, with minimal change in activity outside of work, in response to changes in activity at work. Future interventions may benefit from exploring how best to elicit change throughout the whole day, and across work and non-work domains.
This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials register (ACTRN12611000742976) on 15 July 2011.
目前已有大量证据表明干预措施可有效减少职场久坐时间。然而，对于这些干预措施如何在工作期间和工作之外影响行为，报告却十分有限。本研究在五个时间框架内（工作日工作时间；工作日非工作时间；工作日；非工作日；整体（即所有工作日的工作和非工作时间）），考察了职场干预后坐姿、站立和踏步行走的变化，并评估了工作期间和工作之外变化之间的关系。
该整群随机对照试验“Stand Up Victoria”提供了一种多组件的职场干预措施，成功减少了职场和整体久坐时间（与对照组相比）。此外，在五个时间框架内，使用混合模型，分别比较了干预组（n=114）和对照组（n=84）在设备（activPAL3）评估的结果（坐姿、长时间坐姿（≥30 分钟）、站立和踏步行走）方面的变化，同时还分析了工作时间内坐姿变化的时间进程。使用成分数据分析研究了工作期间变化与工作之外变化之间的潜在关系。
在工作日，与对照组相比，干预组参与者的活动水平显著改善（p<0.05），坐姿减少（-117 分钟/8 小时工作日，95%CI：-141，-93）和长时间坐姿减少（-77 分钟/8 小时工作日，95%CI：-101，-52）；站立时间增加（114 分钟/8 小时工作日，95%CI：92，136）和踏步行走保持不变（3 分钟/8 小时工作日，95%CI：-7，11，p=0.576）。在工作时间内，效果几乎相同；整体效果相似但略弱；在工作日和非工作日的非工作时间，效果较小且无统计学意义。在工作时间内，改善情况始终存在（p<0.001），但并不均衡。在干预组（r=-0.07）和对照组（r=-0.09）中，工作期间和工作之外的变化之间的相关性均非常弱。
在工作期间，坐姿时间几乎完全减少（通过站立来替代），全天各工作时段均有减少，只是程度不同。工作之外的活动没有补偿性变化，表明工作期间活动的变化对工作之外的活动影响很小。未来的干预措施可能受益于探索如何在一整天以及工作和非工作领域内最佳地引发变化。
本试验于 2011 年 7 月 15 日在澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册中心（ACTRN12611000742976）进行了前瞻性注册。
