OBJECTIVE:To examine objectively determined sedentary behavior and physical activity (PA) during and outside working hours in full-time office workers.
METHODS:A total of 170 participants wore an ...ActiGraph GT1M accelerometer for 7 days. Time spent sedentary (<100 counts/min), in light-intensity PA (100 to 1951 counts/min), and moderate-to-vigorous PA (≥1952 counts/min) was calculated for workdays (including working hours and nonworking hours) and nonworkdays.
RESULTS:Participants accumulated significantly higher levels of sedentary behavior (68% vs 60%) and lower levels of light-intensity activity (28% vs 36%) on workdays in comparison with nonworkdays. Up to 71% of working hours were spent sedentary. Individuals who were most sedentary at work were also more sedentary outside work.
CONCLUSIONS:Those who are most sedentary at work do not compensate by increasing their PA or reducing their sedentary time outside work. Occupational interventions should address workplace and leisure-time sedentary behavior.
How many steps/day are enough? For adults Tudor-Locke, Catrine; Craig, Cora L; Brown, Wendy J ...
The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity,
07/2011, Volume:
8, Issue:
1
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
Physical activity guidelines from around the world are typically expressed in terms of frequency, duration, and intensity parameters. Objective monitoring using pedometers and accelerometers offers a ...new opportunity to measure and communicate physical activity in terms of steps/day. Various step-based versions or translations of physical activity guidelines are emerging, reflecting public interest in such guidance. However, there appears to be a wide discrepancy in the exact values that are being communicated. It makes sense that step-based recommendations should be harmonious with existing evidence-based public health guidelines that recognize that "some physical activity is better than none" while maintaining a focus on time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Thus, the purpose of this review was to update our existing knowledge of "How many steps/day are enough?", and to inform step-based recommendations consistent with current physical activity guidelines. Normative data indicate that healthy adults typically take between 4,000 and 18,000 steps/day, and that 10,000 steps/day is reasonable for this population, although there are notable "low active populations." Interventions demonstrate incremental increases on the order of 2,000-2,500 steps/day. The results of seven different controlled studies demonstrate that there is a strong relationship between cadence and intensity. Further, despite some inter-individual variation, 100 steps/minute represents a reasonable floor value indicative of moderate intensity walking. Multiplying this cadence by 30 minutes (i.e., typical of a daily recommendation) produces a minimum of 3,000 steps that is best used as a heuristic (i.e., guiding) value, but these steps must be taken over and above habitual activity levels to be a true expression of free-living steps/day that also includes recommendations for minimal amounts of time in MVPA. Computed steps/day translations of time in MVPA that also include estimates of habitual activity levels equate to 7,100 to 11,000 steps/day. A direct estimate of minimal amounts of MVPA accumulated in the course of objectively monitored free-living behaviour is 7,000-8,000 steps/day. A scale that spans a wide range of incremental increases in steps/day and is congruent with public health recognition that "some physical activity is better than none," yet still incorporates step-based translations of recommended amounts of time in MVPA may be useful in research and practice. The full range of users (researchers to practitioners to the general public) of objective monitoring instruments that provide step-based outputs require good reference data and evidence-based recommendations to be able to design effective health messages congruent with public health physical activity guidelines, guide behaviour change, and ultimately measure, track, and interpret steps/day.
Research examining sedentary behaviour as a potentially independent risk factor for chronic disease morbidity and mortality has expanded rapidly in recent years.
We present a narrative overview of ...the sedentary behaviour measurement literature. Subjective and objective methods of measuring sedentary behaviour suitable for use in population-based research with children and adults are examined. The validity and reliability of each method is considered, gaps in the literature specific to each method identified and potential future directions discussed.
To date, subjective approaches to sedentary behaviour measurement, e.g. questionnaires, have focused predominantly on TV viewing or other screen-based behaviours. Typically, such measures demonstrate moderate reliability but slight to moderate validity. Accelerometry is increasingly being used for sedentary behaviour assessments; this approach overcomes some of the limitations of subjective methods, but detection of specific postures and postural changes by this method is somewhat limited. Instruments developed specifically for the assessment of body posture have demonstrated good reliability and validity in the limited research conducted to date. Miniaturization of monitoring devices, interoperability between measurement and communication technologies and advanced analytical approaches are potential avenues for future developments in this field.
High-quality measurement is essential in all elements of sedentary behaviour epidemiology, from determining associations with health outcomes to the development and evaluation of behaviour change interventions. Sedentary behaviour measurement remains relatively under-developed, although new instruments, both objective and subjective, show considerable promise and warrant further testing.
Background
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends undertaking 150 minutes of moderate‐intensity physical activity per week, but most people do not. Workplaces present opportunities to ...influence behaviour and encourage physical activity, as well as other aspects of a healthy lifestyle. A pedometer is an inexpensive device that encourages physical activity by providing feedback on daily steps, although pedometers are now being largely replaced by more sophisticated devices such as accelerometers and Smartphone apps. For this reason, this is the final update of this review.
Objectives
To assess the effectiveness of pedometer interventions in the workplace for increasing physical activity and improving long‐term health outcomes.
Search methods
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) UPDATE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from the earliest record to December 2016. We also consulted the reference lists of included studies and contacted study authors to identify additional records. We updated this search in May 2019, but these results have not yet been incorporated. One more study, previously identified as an ongoing study, was placed in 'Studies awaiting classification'.
Selection criteria
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of workplace interventions with a pedometer component for employed adults, compared to no or minimal interventions, or to alternative physical activity interventions. We excluded athletes and interventions using accelerometers. The primary outcome was physical activity. Studies were excluded if physical activity was not measured.
Data collection and analysis
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. When studies presented more than one physical activity measure, we used a pre‐specified list of preferred measures to select one measure and up to three time points for analysis. When possible, follow‐up measures were taken after completion of the intervention to identify lasting effects once the intervention had ceased. Given the diversity of measures found, we used ratios of means (RoMs) as standardised effect measures for physical activity.
Main results
We included 14 studies, recruiting a total of 4762 participants. These studies were conducted in various high‐income countries and in diverse workplaces (from offices to physical workplaces). Participants included both healthy populations and those at risk of chronic disease (e.g. through inactivity or overweight), with a mean age of 41 years. All studies used multi‐component health promotion interventions. Eleven studies used minimal intervention controls, and four used alternative physical activity interventions. Intervention duration ranged from one week to two years, and follow‐up after completion of the intervention ranged from three to ten months.
Most studies and outcomes were rated at overall unclear or high risk of bias, and only one study was rated at low risk of bias. The most frequent concerns were absence of blinding and high rates of attrition.
When pedometer interventions are compared to minimal interventions at follow‐up points at least one month after completion of the intervention, pedometers may have no effect on physical activity (6 studies; very low‐certainty evidence; no meta‐analysis due to very high heterogeneity), but the effect is very uncertain. Pedometers may have effects on sedentary behaviour and on quality of life (mental health component), but these effects were very uncertain (1 study; very low‐certainty evidence).
Pedometer interventions may slightly reduce anthropometry (body mass index (BMI) ‐0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) ‐1.45 to 0.18; 3 studies; low‐certainty evidence). Pedometer interventions probably had little to no effect on blood pressure (systolic: ‐0.08 mmHg, 95% CI ‐3.26 to 3.11; 2 studies; moderate‐certainty evidence) and may have reduced adverse effects (such as injuries; from 24 to 10 per 100 people in populations experiencing relatively frequent events; odds ratio (OR) 0.50, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.84; low‐certainty evidence). No studies compared biochemical measures or disease risk scores at follow‐up after completion of the intervention versus a minimal intervention.
Comparison of pedometer interventions to alternative physical activity interventions at follow‐up points at least one month after completion of the intervention revealed that pedometers may have an effect on physical activity, but the effect is very uncertain (1 study; very low‐certainty evidence). Sedentary behaviour, anthropometry (BMI or waist circumference), blood pressure (systolic or diastolic), biochemistry (low‐density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, total cholesterol, or triglycerides), disease risk scores, quality of life (mental or physical health components), and adverse effects at follow‐up after completion of the intervention were not compared to an alternative physical activity intervention.
Some positive effects were observed immediately at completion of the intervention periods, but these effects were not consistent, and overall certainty of evidence was insufficient to assess the effectiveness of workplace pedometer interventions.
Authors' conclusions
Exercise interventions can have positive effects on employee physical activity and health, although current evidence is insufficient to suggest that a pedometer‐based intervention would be more effective than other options. It is important to note that over the past decade, technological advancement in accelerometers as commercial products, often freely available in Smartphones, has in many ways rendered the use of pedometers outdated. Future studies aiming to test the impact of either pedometers or accelerometers would likely find any control arm highly contaminated. Decision‐makers considering allocating resources to large‐scale programmes of this kind should be cautious about the expected benefits of incorporating a pedometer and should note that these effects may not be sustained over the longer term.
Future studies should be designed to identify the effective components of multi‐component interventions, although pedometers may not be given the highest priority (especially considering the increased availability of accelerometers). Approaches to increase the sustainability of intervention effects and behaviours over a longer term should be considered, as should more consistent measures of physical activity and health outcomes.
Being physically active during the early years (age 0-6 years) is vital for healthy development. Identifying correlates and determinants of physical activity (PA) is crucial to guide effective ...interventions. This systematic review synthesized studies investigating potential correlates and determinants of PA during the early years, accounting for different types of PA assessment.
Nine electronic databases were searched from inception year (1900) until September 2014; data were analyzed/interpreted in April 2015. The following inclusion criteria were used: written in English, published in peer-reviewed journals, participants not in statutory/school education, and an observational design investigating associations between an exposure/variable, and a quantitative measure of PA. Correlates/determinants of total, moderate to vigorous, and light PA were reported using an ecologic model.
Of 22,045 identified studies, 130 were included. All took place in high-income countries and few (6%) were of high quality. Correlates of total PA were sex (male, ++); parental PA (+); parental support (+); and time outdoors (+). Determinants of total PA were sex (+) and time spent playing with parents (+). The only correlate of moderate to vigorous PA was sex (male, ++). No determinants of moderate to vigorous or light PA were found. PA correlates/determinants were relatively consistent between objective and subjective PA measures.
Numerous studies investigated potential correlates and determinants of PA, but overall quality was low. A small number of demographic/biological and social/cultural factors were associated with PA. There is a need for high-quality studies exploring correlates/determinants across all domains of the ecologic model.
This study aimed to examine the presence and duration of reactivity to wearing a pedometer and recording daily step counts in free-living adults.
On the first visit to the laboratory, 90 participants ...(69% were females, age = 26.8 ± 13.0 yr, body mass index = 23.4 ± 4.0 kg·m(-2)), blinded to the study aim, were provided with a sealed pedometer (New Lifestyles NL-800) and informed that it was a "body posture monitor" (covert condition). Participants wore the pedometer throughout waking hours for 1 wk. On their return to the laboratory, stored step counts were recorded, and participants were informed that the device was a pedometer. Participants wore the pedometer unsealed (no restriction on viewing the step count display) for 2 wk, during which they recorded their daily step count in a diary (diary condition). Mean daily step counts recorded during the covert condition and during weeks 1 and 2 of the diary condition were compared using a repeated-measures ANOVA.
There was a significant overall effect of study condition (P < 0.001), with post hoc analyses revealing that mean daily step counts reported during the first week of the diary condition (9898 ± 3002 steps per day) were significantly higher than those reported during the covert condition (8331 ± 3010 steps per day) and during the second week of the diary condition (8226 ± 3170 steps per day, P < 0.001).
Reactivity to wearing unsealed pedometers and step count recording seems to last for 1 wk. In the absence of any intervention material, step counts return to normal levels during the second week of monitoring and therefore represent a more accurate estimate of habitual activity. These findings have important implications to both researchers and practitioners interested in the use of pedometers for physical activity surveillance and promotion.
Sedentary behavior is defined as any waking behavior characterized by an energy expenditure of 1.5 METS or less while in a sitting or reclining posture. This study examines this definition by ...assessing the energy cost (METs) of common sitting, standing and walking tasks.
Fifty one adults spent 10 min during each activity in a variety of sitting tasks (watching TV, Playing on the Wii, Playing on the PlayStation Portable (PSP) and typing) and non-sedentary tasks (standing still, walking at 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4, and 1.6 mph). Activities were completed on the same day in a random order following an assessment of resting metabolic rate (RMR). A portable gas analyzer was used to measure oxygen uptake, and data were converted to units of energy expenditure (METs).
Average of standardized MET values for screen-based sitting tasks were: 1.33 (SD: 0.24) METS (TV), 1.41 (SD: 0.28) (PSP), and 1.45 (SD: 0.32) (Typing). The more active, yet still seated, games on the Wii yielded an average of 2.06 (SD: 0.5) METS. Standing still yielded an average of 1.59 (SD: 0.37) METs. Walking MET values increased incrementally with speed from 2.17 to 2.99 (SD: 0.5 - 0.69) METs.
The suggested 1.5 MET threshold for sedentary behaviors seems reasonable however some sitting based activities may be classified as non-sedentary. The effect of this on the definition of sedentary behavior and associations with metabolic health needs further investigation.
This research examined the influence of sit-to-stand desks on classroom sitting time in primary school children.
Pilot controlled trials with similar intervention strategies were conducted in primary ...schools in Melbourne, Australia, and Bradford, UK. Sit-to-stand desks replaced all standard desks in the Australian intervention classroom. Six sit-to-stand desks replaced a bank of standard desks in the UK intervention classroom. Children were exposed to the sit-to-stand desks for 9-10 weeks. Control classrooms retained their normal seated desks. Classroom sitting time was measured at baseline and follow-up using the activPAL3 inclinometer.
Thirty UK and 44 Australian children provided valid activPAL data at baseline and follow-up. The proportion of time spent sitting in class decreased significantly at follow-up in both intervention groups (UK: -9.8 ± 16.5% -52.4 ± 66.6 min/day; Australian: -9.4 ± 10% -43.7 ± 29.9 min/day). No significant changes in classroom sitting time were observed in the UK control group, while a significant reduction was observed in the Australian control group (-5.9 ± 11.7% -28.2 ± 28.3 min/day).
Irrespective of implementation, incorporating sit-to-stand desks into classrooms appears to be an effective way of reducing classroom sitting in this diverse sample of children. Longer term efficacy trials are needed to determine effects on children's health and learning.
Sit-to-stand workstations are becoming common in modern offices and are increasingly being implemented in sedentary behavior interventions. The purpose of this study was to examine whether the ...introduction of such a workstation among office workers leads to reductions in sitting during working hours, and whether office workers compensate for any reduction in sitting at work by increasing sedentary time and decreasing physical activity (PA) outside work.
Office workers (n = 40; 55% female) were given a WorkFit-S, sit-to-stand workstation for 3 months. Participants completed assessments at baseline (before workstation installation), 1 wk and 6 wk after the introduction of the workstation, and again at 3 months (postintervention). Posture and PA were assessed using the activPAL inclinometer and ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer, which participants wore for 7 d during each measurement phase.
Compared with baseline, the proportion of time spent sitting significantly decreased (75% ± 13% vs 52% ± 16% to 56% ± 13%), and time spent standing and in light activity significantly increased (standing: 19% ± 12% vs 32% ± 12% to 37% ± 15%, light PA: 14% ± 4% vs 16% ± 5%) during working hours at all follow-up assessments. However, compared with baseline, the proportion of time spent sitting significantly increased (60% ± 11% vs 66% ± 12% to 68% ± 12%) and light activity significantly decreased (21% ± 5% vs 19% ± 5%) during nonworking hours across the follow-up measurements. No differences were seen in moderate-to-vigorous activity during nonworking hours throughout the study.
The findings suggest that introducing a sit-to-stand workstation can significantly reduce sedentary time and increase light activity levels during working hours. However, these changes were compensated for by reducing activity and increasing sitting outside of working hours. An intervention of a sit-to-stand workstation should be accompanied by an intervention outside of working hours to limit behavior compensation.
ObjectiveThis study aimed to systematically review and summarise the literature on cardiometabolic risk factors, lifestyle health behaviours and mental health status of truck drivers globally to ...ascertain the scale of these health concerns.DesignSystematic review reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.Data sourcesPubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched in January 2019 and updated in January 2020, from the date of inception to 16 January 2020.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesPapers were included if they (1) reported independent data on truck drivers, (2) included quantitative data on outcomes related to cardiometabolic markers of health, mental health and/or health behaviours, (3) were written in English and (4) were published in a peer-reviewed journal. Grey literature was ineligible for this review.Data extraction and synthesisOne reviewer independently extracted data and assessed methodological quality using a checklist based on the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Quality Assessment tool. 20% were independently assessed for eligibility and quality by a second reviewer. Due to heterogeneity of the outcomes, results were narratively presented.Results3601 titles and abstracts were screened. Seventy-three studies met the inclusion criteria. Truck driving is associated with enforced sedentarism, long and irregular working hours, lack of healthy foods, social isolation and chronic time pressures. Strong evidence was observed for truck drivers to generally exhibit poor cardiometabolic risk profiles including overweight and obesity, hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, high blood glucose, poor mental health and cigarette smoking.ConclusionsImproving truck driver health is vital for the longevity of the trucking industry, and for the safety of all road users. The workplace plays a vital role in truck driver health; policies, regulations and procedures are required to address this health crisis.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019124499.
PDF
