2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.06.011
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Office workers' objectively assessed total and prolonged sitting time: Individual-level correlates and worksite variations

Abstract: Sedentary behavior is highly prevalent in office-based workplaces; however, few studies have assessed the attributes associated with this health risk factor in the workplace setting. This study aimed to identify the correlates of office workers' objectively-assessed total and prolonged (≥ 30 min bouts) workplace sitting time. Participants were 231 Australian office workers recruited from 14 sites of a single government employer in 2012–13. Potential socio-demographic, work-related, health-related and cognitive… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

7
99
3

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

3
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(111 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
7
99
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering that sitting is a highly habitual behaviour [35], participants’ confidence in their ability to stand up in the workplace despite potential barriers may have been particularly important following conclusion of the individual-level support elements (i.e., after 3 months). This is in contrast to two cross-sectional studies (including baseline results of this trial [23]) that failed to find an association between workplace sitting time and self-efficacy [16, 23]. Low levels of self-efficacy amongst participants was suggested as an explanation for the null finding in one of these studies [16].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
“…Considering that sitting is a highly habitual behaviour [35], participants’ confidence in their ability to stand up in the workplace despite potential barriers may have been particularly important following conclusion of the individual-level support elements (i.e., after 3 months). This is in contrast to two cross-sectional studies (including baseline results of this trial [23]) that failed to find an association between workplace sitting time and self-efficacy [16, 23]. Low levels of self-efficacy amongst participants was suggested as an explanation for the null finding in one of these studies [16].…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 91%
“…Another study, performed in Canada, showed variations for changes in sitting and standing time, where the office staff reduced their sitting time and increased their standing time significantly more than the faculty staff after moving to an activity-permissive office (47). Hadgraft et al (48) identified BMI and organizational tenure as correlates of both total and prolonged sitting time and Pesola et al (39) found their intervention to be more effective among women than men regarding increasing breaks from sedentary time and LPA at work. As our study participants were mainly women, it is difficult for us to draw conclusions on possible differences between genders, although it would be of interest to study if the same differences would appear in a study with comparable large groups of men and women.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exposure to high levels of workplace sedentary (sitting) time has become common, particularly in office environments [3]. Considering many adults spend large proportions of time at work, and there has been a steady decrease in the physicality of work tasks, workplaces have been identified as a priority setting to promote healthy behavior.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%