Effectiveness of different interventions to reduce occupational sitting among office administrators at Rhodes University
- Authors: Malesa, Thato
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Standing position , Sedentary behavior , Work environment , Employee health promotion , Office furniture -- Design , Industrial hygiene , Employees -- Health risk assessment , Human engineering , Compliance
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/166403 , vital:41360
- Description: Background: Sitting for prolonged periods is common in the working environment. Office workers are exposed to long periods of sitting time at work. Research has reported associations between prolonged sitting and negative health implications. As such studies have proposed different interventions aimed at reducing sitting times in the workplace. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of two different interventions, physical intervention (sit-stand worktables) and personal intervention (instruction to stretch) on compliance and reducing occupational sitting behaviour. The study also aimed to investigate the effectiveness of interventions in improving or impairing mood. Methods: The study took the form of a fieldbased study atRhodes University, Makhanda, South Africa. Fifteen full–time office workers in different divisions participated in the study. Participants were randomly allocated to either the physical or personal intervention group. In both intervention groups, partic ipants were prompted to stand for five minutes every hour during the workday to either work in a standing position or perform stretches. Over the course of the experiment, desk occupancy, sitting/standing time and mood effect were recorded in both intervention groups Both intervention groups were monitored for a period of three months (58 days). Results: The study found that the physical intervention group was an effective approach to reduce prolonged sitting in the workplace in comparison to the personal intervention group. Over the course of the experiment, there was sustain usage of interventions in both groups, however, in the physical intervention group desk usage decreased overtime. The findings of the study also show that some participants were more compliant with the study procedures than others. It was also found that mood improved upon introducing interventions in the workplace. However, with the outcomes of the results, the study acknowledges that several factors emerged which are likely to impact compliance, which future studies may investigate. Conclusion: Although sit-stand worktables are expensive, it seems like introducing them was successful in reducing sitting time and changing sitting behaviour in comparison to an intervention that instruct s individuals to stand up and stretch.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
- Authors: Malesa, Thato
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Standing position , Sedentary behavior , Work environment , Employee health promotion , Office furniture -- Design , Industrial hygiene , Employees -- Health risk assessment , Human engineering , Compliance
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/166403 , vital:41360
- Description: Background: Sitting for prolonged periods is common in the working environment. Office workers are exposed to long periods of sitting time at work. Research has reported associations between prolonged sitting and negative health implications. As such studies have proposed different interventions aimed at reducing sitting times in the workplace. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of two different interventions, physical intervention (sit-stand worktables) and personal intervention (instruction to stretch) on compliance and reducing occupational sitting behaviour. The study also aimed to investigate the effectiveness of interventions in improving or impairing mood. Methods: The study took the form of a fieldbased study atRhodes University, Makhanda, South Africa. Fifteen full–time office workers in different divisions participated in the study. Participants were randomly allocated to either the physical or personal intervention group. In both intervention groups, partic ipants were prompted to stand for five minutes every hour during the workday to either work in a standing position or perform stretches. Over the course of the experiment, desk occupancy, sitting/standing time and mood effect were recorded in both intervention groups Both intervention groups were monitored for a period of three months (58 days). Results: The study found that the physical intervention group was an effective approach to reduce prolonged sitting in the workplace in comparison to the personal intervention group. Over the course of the experiment, there was sustain usage of interventions in both groups, however, in the physical intervention group desk usage decreased overtime. The findings of the study also show that some participants were more compliant with the study procedures than others. It was also found that mood improved upon introducing interventions in the workplace. However, with the outcomes of the results, the study acknowledges that several factors emerged which are likely to impact compliance, which future studies may investigate. Conclusion: Although sit-stand worktables are expensive, it seems like introducing them was successful in reducing sitting time and changing sitting behaviour in comparison to an intervention that instruct s individuals to stand up and stretch.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
The effect of total standing duration during sit-stand regimes on cognitive performance, rating of perceived exertion and heart rate frequency
- Authors: Berndt, Ethan
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Standing position , Sedentary behavior , Work environment , Employee health promotion , Office furniture -- Design , Industrial hygiene , Employees -- Health risk assessment , Human engineering
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/7433 , vital:21260
- Description: Although there may be numerous health benefits of sit-stand workstations, the effects of sedentary or non-sedentary work configurations on cognitive performance and executive function remain unclear (Bantoft et al., 2016). It is essential to determine any performance effects of these different work configurations; as improvements in the workplace, working posture and discomfort need to be justified in terms of improvements (or no deterioration) in work performance (Liao and Drury, 2000). The aim of the current research was to investigate the effect of two sit-stand regimes differing in total standing duration, on cognitive task performance, physiological responses and subjective ratings of perceived exertion. This laboratory based investigation incorporated a repeated measures design, where a test battery was utilized. Three experimental conditions were tested during three separate testing sessions by 30 participants. Condition 2 (15 minutes standing, followed by 45 minutes seated) and Condition 3 (15 minutes seated, followed by 15 minutes standing, followed by 15 minutes seated, followed by 15 minutes standing) were compared to each other and Condition 1 (60 minutes seated). The findings of this study show that even though the two different sit-stand regimes did not result in a significant impact on cognitive task performance, an immediate postural effect for psychomotor response time and a delayed postural effect for working memory were found. The participants perceived Condition 3 as the most physically exerting condition. Heart rate frequency was not significantly different between the conditions, but the immediate seated posture had a significantly lower heart rate frequency compared to the standing posture; indicating that being seated elicited lower energy expenditure compared to standing. Heart rate frequency while standing had a greater degree of variation compared to being seated. Taking the findings of this study into account, it is recommended that: one should be seated while performing this type of working memory task; that one should be standing while performing this type of psychomotor task; that the recommendation that implementing standing at work can be used as a blanket strategy to increase energy expenditure in all individuals needs to be explored further and that individual differences may impact energy expenditure.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Berndt, Ethan
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Standing position , Sedentary behavior , Work environment , Employee health promotion , Office furniture -- Design , Industrial hygiene , Employees -- Health risk assessment , Human engineering
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/7433 , vital:21260
- Description: Although there may be numerous health benefits of sit-stand workstations, the effects of sedentary or non-sedentary work configurations on cognitive performance and executive function remain unclear (Bantoft et al., 2016). It is essential to determine any performance effects of these different work configurations; as improvements in the workplace, working posture and discomfort need to be justified in terms of improvements (or no deterioration) in work performance (Liao and Drury, 2000). The aim of the current research was to investigate the effect of two sit-stand regimes differing in total standing duration, on cognitive task performance, physiological responses and subjective ratings of perceived exertion. This laboratory based investigation incorporated a repeated measures design, where a test battery was utilized. Three experimental conditions were tested during three separate testing sessions by 30 participants. Condition 2 (15 minutes standing, followed by 45 minutes seated) and Condition 3 (15 minutes seated, followed by 15 minutes standing, followed by 15 minutes seated, followed by 15 minutes standing) were compared to each other and Condition 1 (60 minutes seated). The findings of this study show that even though the two different sit-stand regimes did not result in a significant impact on cognitive task performance, an immediate postural effect for psychomotor response time and a delayed postural effect for working memory were found. The participants perceived Condition 3 as the most physically exerting condition. Heart rate frequency was not significantly different between the conditions, but the immediate seated posture had a significantly lower heart rate frequency compared to the standing posture; indicating that being seated elicited lower energy expenditure compared to standing. Heart rate frequency while standing had a greater degree of variation compared to being seated. Taking the findings of this study into account, it is recommended that: one should be seated while performing this type of working memory task; that one should be standing while performing this type of psychomotor task; that the recommendation that implementing standing at work can be used as a blanket strategy to increase energy expenditure in all individuals needs to be explored further and that individual differences may impact energy expenditure.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »