3.8 Article

Six-month follow-up of a theory-informed, multi-component intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in the workplace

Journal

COGENT PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 5, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/23311908.2018.1501170

Keywords

sitting time; occupational; intervention

Ask authors/readers for more resources

There is limited evidence exploring the long-term effectiveness of sedentary behaviour interventions. This study aimed to explore participant experiences six months post-intervention to evaluate the long-term effectiveness of a low-cost, theory-informed, multi-component, individually tailored, six-week intervention for the reduction of occupational sedentary behaviour. Twenty-five participants who completed a sedentary behaviour intervention participated in a six-month follow-up. Participants wore an activity monitoring device and participated in a semi-structured interview. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed. The pre- and post-intervention quantitative data were analysed via paired samples t-tests. Occupational sitting time was reduced by an average of 40.6 +/- 76.1 min/work day at six months as compared to pre-intervention. Twenty-three participants indicated that they had continued with their occupational sedentary behaviour change with various stages of change identified. Self-efficacy towards goal achievement remained high at the six-month follow-up. The most prominent goal identified by the participants to reduce occupational sedentary behaviour was walking. Barriers included attending seated meetings, perceived workloads or work tasks and work environments. Suggested strategies to overcome barriers included changing the work environment, providing prompts and receiving support from management. The current study provides insight into the long-term adherence to an occupational sedentary behaviour intervention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available