The effects on self-efficacy, motivation and perceived barriers of an intervention targeting physical activity and sedentary behaviours in office workers: A cluster randomized control trial

Abstract

Background The importance of physical activity on health is clear, but changing behaviour is difficult. Successful interventions aiming to improve physical activity and reduce sedentary behaviour is therefore of importance. The aim of this study was to evaluate effects on motivation, self-efficacy and barriers to change behaviour from two different behavioral intervention focusing either on reducing sedentary behaviour or on increasing physical activity as compared to a waiting list control group Methods The study was designed as a cluster randomized control trial (RCT) within two private companies. Self-efficacy, motivation and perceived barriers were together with demographic variables assessed before and after a 6-month intervention. Participants were assigned a cluster team which was randomly allocated to either the physical activity intervention (iPA), the sedentary behaviour intervention (iSED), or control group. Group differences were determined using Bayesian multilevel modelling (parameter estimate; credible interval (CI)), analysing complete cases and those who adhered to the protocol by adhering to at least 3 out of 5 intervention sessions. Results After the intervention, the complete cases analysis showed that the iPA group had significantly higher autonomous motivation (0.33, CI: 0.05–0.61) and controlled motivation (0.27, CI: 0.04–0.51) for physical activity compared with the control group, and the iSED group scored less autonomous and controlled motivation compared to the iPA group (0.38, CI: -0.69- -0.087 respectively − 0.32, CI: -0.57-0.07). Among individuals that adhered to the protocol, the results showed higher scores on Exercise (3.03, CI: 0.28–6.02) and Sedentary self-efficacy (3.59, CI: 0.35–7.15) for individuals in the iPA group and on Sedentary self-efficacy (4.77, CI: 0.59–9.44) for the iSED group compared to the control group. Conclusion These findings indicate that the interventions were successful in increasing self-efficacy in each intervention group and autonomous motivation for exercise in the iPA group, in particular when actively participating in the motivational counselling sessions.

The Effects of UPcomplish on Office Workers’ Sedentary Behaviour, Quality of Life and Psychosocial Determinants: A Stepped-Wedge Design

“…lengthy meetings at round-tables). Additionally, SB has become a habitual process because it is linked to diverse contexts and activities, such as work, and standing at work is perceived as uncomfortable [65][66][67]. Unsurprisingly, therefore, that others only found significant SB reductions on weekends [20,26].…”

“…Additional to positive feedback, it might, hence, be important to still remind participants of their initial goals and general SB recommendations. Blom et al evaluated two personal counselling interventions and only found an increase in controlled and autonomous motivation after the physical activity intervention and not after the SB intervention [ 67 ]. It might be helpful to have another personal meeting in the middle of the intervention, to keep sending two FBMs per week, or to adapt the FBMs themselves, also with a greater focus on healthy alternative behaviours and reminding of SB recommendations.…”