3.8 Article

Movement-enhancing library workplaces at universities A study on effectiveness and acceptance among students

期刊

PRAVENTION UND GESUNDHEITSFORDERUNG
卷 16, 期 4, 页码 290-295

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11553-020-00806-9

关键词

Sedentary behavior; Sit-to-stand transition; Students; University setting; Library

资金

  1. Projekt DEAL

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Implementing movement-enhancing, height-adjustable workstations in university libraries can significantly reduce students' sitting time and increase sitting interruptions, with positive evaluation and high acceptance among users, contributing to students' well-being.
Background Lack of physical activity and long, uninterrupted periods of sitting are increasingly considered as independent health risk factors and are very pronounced in people with a high level of education. This particularly affects young adults in general and university students in particular. Objectives Evaluation of acceptance and effectiveness of a preventive intervention to reduce sitting time and increase the sitting interruptions of students at the university. Materials and methods A mixed methods design (quantitative recording of the motion profile by motion sensors and qualitative guideline interviews) was used for the implementation of movement-enhancing, height-adjustable workstations in a university library to evaluate the sedentary behavior of 10 students. Results The use of height-adjustable workplaces that promote movement results in a significant reduction in sitting time and a significant increase in sitting interruptions. In addition, a positive evaluation and high level of acceptance of the new workplaces among users can be seen and a contribution can be made to their well-being Conclusions The use of movement-enhancing workplaces in university libraries can be an effective intervention to increase health-promoting conditions in the university setting and thus to contribute to an increase in a lifestyle that promotes physical activity among students.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据