National Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Studiestræde 6, 1455, Copenhagen, Denmark.
BMC Public Health. 2020 Aug 8;20(1):1209. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09226-y.
Multicomponent workplace-based interventions aimed at reducing sitting time among office workers are becoming increasingly popular. 'Take a Stand!' was such an intervention, reducing sitting time by 71 min after 1 month and 48 min after 3 months. However, it is unclear how the implementation process of 'Take a Stand!' affected these results. The present study explored how individual factors and organizational context influenced implementation and effect in 'Take a Stand!'
This was a mixed-methods study, combining data from interviews, questionnaires and accelerometers. Directed content analysis was used for analysing interviews with participants, ambassadors and managers from the 10 intervention offices in the 'Take a Stand!'
Categories for analysis were taken from Framework for Evaluating Organizational-level Interventions. Interview data were combined with questionnaire and activity data, and multilevel analysis was undertaken to assess how changes in sitting time varied depending on the assessed factors. In addition, interview data were used to underpin results from the multilevel analysis.
Concurrent institutional changes were found to be a barrier for the intervention by ambassadors, while participants and managers did not find it to be an issue. Management support was consistently highlighted as very important. Participants evaluated ambassadors as being generally adequately active but also, that the role had a greater potential. The motivational and social aspects of the intervention were considered important for the effect. This was supported by regression analyses, which showed that a strong desire to change sitting time habits, strong motivation towards the project, and a high sense of collective engagement were associated to less sitting time at 3 months of about 30 min/8 h working day compared to participants with low scores. Influence from other participants (e.g. seeing others raise their tables) and the use of humour were continuously highlighted by participants as positive for implementation. Finally, the intervention was found to influence the social climate at the workplace positively.
Individual motivation was related to the sitting time effect of 'Take a Stand!', but the organizational culture was relevant both to the implementation and effect within the office community. The organizational culture included among others to ensure general participation, to uphold management and peer-support, and maintain a positive environment during the intervention period.
ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01996176 . Prospectively registered 21 November 2013.
旨在减少办公室工作人员久坐时间的多成分工作场所干预措施正变得越来越流行。“站起来!”就是这样一种干预措施,在 1 个月后减少了 71 分钟的久坐时间,在 3 个月后减少了 48 分钟。然而,尚不清楚“站起来!”的实施过程如何影响这些结果。本研究探讨了个体因素和组织环境如何影响“站起来!”的实施和效果。
这是一项混合方法研究,结合了参与者、大使和来自 10 个干预办公室的经理的访谈、问卷调查和加速度计的数据。采用定向内容分析法分析了来自“站起来!”计划中 10 个干预办公室的参与者、大使和经理的访谈。
分析类别取自评估组织层面干预措施的框架。访谈数据与问卷和活动数据相结合,并进行多层次分析,以评估久坐时间的变化如何取决于评估因素。此外,访谈数据用于支持多层次分析的结果。
同时进行的体制变革被发现是大使实施该干预措施的障碍,而参与者和经理并不认为这是一个问题。管理支持一直被强调为非常重要。参与者评估大使通常足够活跃,但也认为该角色有更大的潜力。干预措施的激励和社会方面被认为对效果很重要。这得到了回归分析的支持,该分析表明,与得分较低的参与者相比,强烈改变久坐时间习惯的愿望、对项目的强烈动机以及强烈的集体参与感与 3 个月内每天工作 8 小时减少约 30 分钟的久坐时间有关。参与者不断强调其他参与者(例如看到其他人抬高桌子)的影响和使用幽默对实施有积极影响。最后,该干预措施被发现对工作场所的社会氛围产生了积极影响。
个体动机与“站起来!”的久坐时间效果有关,但组织文化与办公室社区内的实施和效果都有关。组织文化包括确保普遍参与、维护管理和同行支持,以及在干预期间保持积极的环境。
ClinicalTrials.gov,NCT01996176。2013 年 11 月 21 日前瞻性注册。