Effect of a novel two-desk sit-to-stand workplace (ACTIVE OFFICE) on sitting time, performance and physiological parameters: protocol for a randomized control trial

Abstract

BackgroundProlonged sitting is ubiquitous in modern society and linked to several diseases. Height-adjustable desks are being used to decrease worksite based sitting time (ST). Single-desk sit-to-stand workplaces exhibit small ST reduction potential and short-term loss in performance. The aim of this paper is to report the study design and methodology of an ACTIVE OFFICE trial.DesignThe study was a 1-year three-arm, randomized controlled trial in 18 healthy Austrian office workers. Allocation was done via a regional health insurance, with data collection during Jan 2014 – March 2015. Participants were allocated to either an intervention or control group. Intervention group subjects were provided with traditional or two-desk sit-to-stand workstations in either the first or the second half of the study, while control subjects did not experience any changes during the whole study duration.Sitting time and physical activity (IPAQ-long), cognitive performance (text editing task, Stroop-test, d2R test of attention), workload perception (NASA-TLX) and physiological parameters (salivary cortisol, heartrate variability and body weight) were measured pre- and post-intervention (23 weeks after baseline) for intervention and control periods. Postural changes and sitting/standing time (software logger) were recorded at the workplace for the whole intervention period.DiscussionThis study evaluates the effects of a novel two-desk sit-to-stand workplace on sitting time, physical parameters and work performance of healthy office based workers. If the intervention proves effective, it has a great potential to be implemented in regular workplaces to reduce diseases related to prolonged sitting.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02825303, July 2016 (retrospectively registered).

Effect of alternating postures on cognitive performance for healthy people performing sedentary work

“…The study protocol ( Figure 2) -based on the one proposed by Schwartz and colleagues (Schwartz et al 2016) -comprised of a preparation phase, followed by five repeated trials of a test battery (described below) that assessed: reaction time [digital Stroop test, (Stroop 1935)], working speed (text editing task, self-developed see Appendix 1) and attention [d2R-test of attention, (Brickenkamp, Schmidt-Atzert, and Liepmann 2010)]. The measurement day concluded with a closing questionnaire.…”

Medium-term effects of a two-desk sit/stand workstation on cognitive performance and workload for healthy people performing sedentary work: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

“…In this two-arm, randomised controlled cross-sover trial, 18 office workers randomly recruited via e-mail by regional health insurance were randomly allocated to either an intervention arm (study arm I) or a control arm (study arm II) by means of a covariate adaptive randomisation (Kang, Ragan, and Park 2008). Details of the study design can be found in Schwartz et al (2016). According to the cross-over design of this study, arm I participants were randomly allocated to two different subgroups (Figure 1).…”

“…The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Vienna (Reference number: 00052) and was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02825303, July 2016). A detailed description of the study protocol (exclusion and inclusion criteria, sample size calculations and screening) was previously published (Schwartz et al 2016).…”

“…The study protocol, described in detail by Schwartz et al (2016), consisted of completion of two questionnaires (International Physical Activity Questionnaire -IPAQ and NASA Task Load Index -NASA TLX), resting periods, and a test-battery. The study protocol took approximately 4-4.5 h to complete and was designed to assess reaction time, cognitive performance, working speed, accuracy, workload, physical activity, and sedentary behaviour ( Figure 3).…”

“…As described by Schwartz et al (2016), this study was intended to quantify the medium-term effects of using a sit-stand intervention device strategy. With this design, it is not possible to draw any conclusions about the long-term sustainability of the measured differences in performance.…”