Stine Kloster

Take a Stand!–a multi-component intervention aimed at reducing sitting time among office workers–a cluster randomized trial

Background Prolonged sitting time has been associated with adverse health outcomes. Interventions at work may contribute to reduced sitting. The objective was to test if a multicomponent work-based intervention can reduce sitting time and the number of prolonged sitting periods (> 30 min), increase the number of sit-to-stand transitions and decrease waist circumference and body fat percentage among office workers. Primary outcomes were: change in sitting time, prolonged sitting periods and sit-to-stand transitions at follow-up 1 month later. Methods At four workplaces, 19 offices (317 workers in total) were cluster randomized for intervention or control. The intervention included the appointment of local ambassadors, management support, environmental changes, a lecture and a workshop. Sitting time was measured using an ActiGraph GT3X+ fixed on the thigh. Data were processed using Acti4 software providing data on time spent sitting, standing and doing other activities. Control participants were instructed to behave as usual. Follow-up measurements were obtained after 1 and 3 months. Results At 1 and 3 months, total sitting time was 71 ( P < 0.001) and 48 min ( P < 0.001) lower per 8-h workday in the intervention group compared with the control group. At 1 month, the number of prolonged sitting periods was lower (-0.79/8-h workday, P < 0.001) and sit-to-stand transitions were higher (+14%/sitting hour, P = 0.001) in the intervention compared with the control group. After 3 months, trends persisted. The body fat percentage was lower by 0.61 percentage points ( P = 0.011) in the intervention group compared with the control group after 3 months. Conclusions The multicomponent workplace-based intervention was effective in reducing sitting time, prolonged sitting periods and body fat percentage, and in increasing the number of sit-to-stand transitions.

How Does Definition of Minimum Break Length Affect Objective Measures of Sitting Outcomes Among Office Workers

BACKGROUND Harmful health effects associated with sedentary behavior may be attenuated by breaking up long periods of sitting by standing or walking. However, studies assess interruptions in sitting time differently, making comparisons between studies difficult. It has not previously been described how the definition of minimum break duration affects sitting outcomes. Therefore, the aim was to address how definitions of break length affect total sitting time, number of sit-to-stand transitions, prolonged sitting periods and time accumulated in prolonged sitting periods among office workers. METHODS Data were collected from 317 office workers. Thigh position was assessed with an ActiGraph GT3X+ fixed on the right thigh. Data were exported with varying bout length of breaks. Afterward, sitting outcomes were calculated for the respective break lengths. RESULTS Absolute numbers of sit-to-stand transitions decreased, and number of prolonged sitting periods and total time accumulated in prolonged sitting periods increased, with increasing minimum break length. Total sitting time was not influenced by varying break length. CONCLUSIONS The definition of minimum break length influenced the sitting outcomes with the exception of total sitting time. A standard definition of break length is needed for comparison and interpretation of studies in the evolving research field of sedentary behavior.

“A welfare recipient may be drinking, but as long as he does as told – he may drink himself to death”: a qualitative analysis of project implementation barriers among Danish job consultants

BackgroundThis paper is embedded in a randomised controlled trial (Alcohol and Employment) that investigated whether welfare-to-work schemes combined with alcohol treatment were more effective than welfare-to-work schemes alone for helping unemployed welfare recipients with alcohol problems get back to employment and reduce their alcohol problems. The implementation of Alcohol and Employment turned out to be challenging, and fewer welfare recipients than expected were enrolled. The aim of this paper was to identify and investigate obstacles to the implementation of Alcohol and Employment. Our main objective was to study the job consultants’ role in the implementation process as they were key personnel in conducting the trial.MethodsThe process evaluation was conducted in four Danish municipalities in 2011–2012. Data for identifying factors important for the implementation were collected through observations and focus group interviews with job consultants. Data were analysed thematically and thoroughly discussed among members of the project team; emerging themes were then grouped and read again repeatedly until the themes were consistent.ResultsThree themes emerged as the main factors influencing the degree of implementation of Alcohol and Employment: (1) The job consultants’ personal attitudes toward alcohol were an important factor. The job consultants generally did not consider a high alcohol intake to be an impediment to employment, or they thought that alcohol problems were only symptoms of more profound problems. (2) The job consultants’ perception of their own roles and responsibilities in relation to the welfare recipients was a barrier: they felt that addressing alcohol problems and at the same time sustaining trust with the welfare recipient was difficult. Also, they did not consider alcohol problems to be their responsibility. (3) Shortage of time and resources among the job consultants was determined to be an influential factor.ConclusionsWe identified important factors at the individual level among the job consultants who threatened the implementation of Alcohol and Employment. Future studies in similar settings can take advantage of these findings when preparing interventions that are implemented by job consultants or similar professionals.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01416103.