Feasibility of Reducing and Breaking Up University Students' Sedentary Behaviour: Pilot Trial and Process Evaluation

Abstract

Background: Accumulating high levels of sedentary behaviour has been linked to poor health outcomes. This study examined the feasibility and preliminary, short-term effects of a theory-based intervention aimed at reducing total and prolonged sedentary behaviour in University students.Design: A quasi-experimental (pre-post) pilot study. Methods: Nine ambulatory undergraduate students (Mean age = 22 ± 2.32) participated in a one-on-one session, including an educational component around the health effects of sedentary behaviour and three distinct activities (feedback, “pros and cons” exercise, and suggested behaviour change strategies). In addition, automated daily text messages targeting sedentary behaviour were sent for 6 days (four messages per day at fixed intervals). The Behaviour Change Wheel framework guided the intervention design process. Outcomes were assessed over 6 days in pre- and post-intervention periods and included accelerometer-based (activPAL) and self-reported (Nightly-Week-U) total sedentary time, as well as accelerometer-based number of steps and prolonged sedentary time. Students completed a process evaluation interview upon completing the trial.Results: From pre- to post-intervention, there was a significant reduction in accelerometer-based total and prolonged sedentary time during weekend days. In addition, there was a significant increase in accelerometer-based standing time and stepping during weekend days. There were no statistically significant changes in accelerometer-based sedentary time, standing time or number of steps during weekdays. Process evaluation results indicated that the intervention and its assessment is feasible. Reductions in sedentary time were likely to be mediated by positive changes in the student's reflective and automatic motivation.Conclusions: Findings from this small, short-term intervention suggest that a single one-on-one session, together with automated text messages, may help University students reduce sedentary behaviour and enhance movement during weekend days. Additional strategies to maximise the intervention effects are discussed (e.g., establishing a collaboration with University staff, introducing sit-to-stand desks, and/or facilitating social support). A randomised control trial assessing sedentary behaviour over a longer period is needed to adequately study the intervention's effectiveness.

Promotion of Physical Activity Among University Students With Social Media Or Text Messaging: A Systematic Review

“…The most common intervention type combines an educational component (e.g., lectures, leaflets) and reinforcement through instant messages. Six studies (Nam and Cha, 16 Lua et al, 20 Sandrick et al, 21 Castro et al, 22 , Dillon et al, 23 and Hardan-Khalil et al 24 ) adopted this kind of intervention, 3 (Nam and Cha, 16 Lua et al, 20 and Dillon et al 23 ) of which with a passive control that did not receive any intervention (this makes it impossible to separate the educational component from the messages), while 2 (Sandrick et al 21 and Hardan-Khalil et al 24 ) had a control group that received the educational portion of the intervention but not the messages and 1 (Castro et al 22 ) did not have a control group (i.e., a “before and after” study).…”

“…Four studies (Castro et al, 22 Dillon et al, 23 Cotten and Prapavessis, 25 and Figueroa et al 26 ) only used messaging, but with varying characteristics of the control group. Two studies (Castro et al 22 and Figueroa et al 26 ) had no control at all (micro-randomized type and “before and after”), 1 article (Dillon et al 23 ) had a control that received no intervention, while the comparison group of the last study (Cotten and Prapavessis 25 ) received messages containing generic topics about health, but not specifically about physical activity.…”

“…In 2 articles (Rote et al 15 and Figueroa et al 26 ), participants’ daily steps were measured, which could also be considered as a form of physical activity measurement. An independent measure of sedentary behavior was used in 1 study (Castro et al 22 ), while 4 studies (Dillon et al, 23 Cotten and Prapavessis, 25 Zhang et al, 30 and Keahey et al 32 ) combined the measurement of sedentary behavior with physical activity.…”

“…The most common method of measuring physical activity or sedentary behavior was self-reporting through questionnaires. This method was used in 14 studies (Cavallo et al, 14 Nam and Cha, 16 Alshahrani et al, 17 Lua et al, 20 Sandrick et al, 21 Castro et al, 22 Dillon et al, 23 Hardan-Khalil et al, 24 Cotten and Prapavessis, 25 Figueroa et al, 26 Wang et al, 28 Gilbert et al, 29 Todorovic et al, 31 and Keahey et al 32 ), that is, nearly three-quarters of all studies reviewed. The most frequently used questionnaire is the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ), often in its short form (IPAQ Short Form or IPAQ-S).…”

“…Two studies (Pope et al 18 and Castro et al 22 ) combined questionnaires with objective measures, using devices such as activ-Pal, pedometers, smartwatches, and even pedometer embedded in the students’ smartphones (Figueroa et al 26 ), while 3 (Rote et al, 15 Pope et al, 18 and Pope and Gao 19 ) just used these objective measures (without associating them with a self-reported measure).…”