"Why would you want to stand?" an account of the lived experience of employees taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention

Jennifer Hall, Tess Kay, Alison McConnell, Louise Mansfield, Jennifer Hall, Tess Kay, Alison McConnell, Louise Mansfield

Abstract

Background: Sit-stand desk interventions have the potential to reduce workplace sedentary behaviour and improve employee health. However, the extent of sit-stand desk use varies between employees and in different organisational contexts. Framed by organisational cultural theory and product design theory, this study examined employees' lived experience of taking part in a workplace sit-stand desk intervention, to understand the processes influencing feasibility and acceptability.

Methods: Participant observations and qualitative interviews were conducted with 15 employees from two office-based workplaces in the UK, as part of a process evaluation that ran alongside a pilot RCT of a workplace sit-stand desk intervention. Observational field notes and transcripts were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results: Three themes related to the experience of using a sit-stand desk at work were generated: employees' relationship with their sit-stand desk; aspirations and outcomes related to employee health and productivity; and cultural norms and interpersonal relationships. The perceived usability of the desk varied depending on how employees interacted with the desk within their personal and organisational context. Employees reported that the perceived influence of the desk on their productivity levels shaped use of the desk; those who perceived that standing increased energy and alertness tended to stand more often. Sit-stand desks were voiced as being more acceptable than intervention strategies that involve leaving the desk, as productivity was conflated with being at the desk.

Conclusions: The findings indicate a range of organisational, social-cultural and individual-level factors that shape the feasibility and acceptability of sit-stand desk use, and suggest strategies for improving employees' experiences of using a sit-stand desk at work, which might positively influence sedentary behaviour reduction and health.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02172599, 22nd June 2014 (prospectively registered).

Keywords: Multi-component intervention; Organisational culture; Physical activity; Product design; Qualitative; Sedentary behaviour; Sitting; Standing; UK; Workplace health.

Conflict of interest statement

One of the participating organisations part-funded this research. The sit-stand desks that were utilised within this research were provided in kind by Ergotron Inc.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Depiction of Ergotron Workfit-A (left) and Ergotron Workfit-D (right). Published with permission from www.ergotron.com
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Providing sit-stand desks: Recommendations for workplaces

References

    1. Löllgen H, Böckenhoff A, Knapp G. Physical activity and all-cause mortality: an updated meta-analysis with different intensity categories. Int J Sports Med. 2009;30(03):213–224. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1128150.
    1. Kyu HH, Bachman VF, Alexander LT, Mumford JE, Afshin A, Estep K. Physical activity and risk of breast cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and ischemic stroke events: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Br Med J. 2016;354:3857. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i3857.
    1. Schuch F, Vancampfort D, Firth J, Rosenbaum S, Ward P, Reichert T. Physical activity and sedentary behavior in people with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Affect Disord. 2017;210:139–150. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2016.10.050.
    1. Pate RR, O'Neill JR, Lobelo F. The evolving definition of “sedentary”. Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2008;36(4):173–178. doi: 10.1097/JES.0b013e3181877d1a.
    1. Patterson R, McNamara E, Tainio M, de Sá TH, Smith AD, Sharp SJ. Sedentary behaviour and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality, and incident type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and dose response meta-analysis. Euro J Epidemiol. 2018;33(9):811–829. doi: 10.1007/s10654-018-0380-1.
    1. Clemes SA, O'connell SE, Edwardson CL. Office workers’ objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity during and outside working hours. J Occup Environ Med. 2014;56:298–303. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000101.
    1. Department of Health . Start active, stay active: a report on physical activity from the four home countries’ Chief Medical Officers. London: DH; 2011.
    1. Buckley JP, Hedge A, Yates T, Copeland RJ, Loosemore M, Hamer M, Bradley G, Dunstan DW. The sedentary office: a growing case for change towards better health and productivity. Expert statement commissioned by Public Health England and the Active Working Community Interest Company. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(21):1353. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094618.
    1. Chu AY, Ng SX, Tan CS, Win AM, Koh D, Müller-Riemenschneider F. A systematic review and meta-analysis of workplace intervention strategies to reduce sedentary time in white-collar workers. Obesity Rev. 2016;17(5):467–481. doi: 10.1111/obr.12388.
    1. Gilson N, Burton NW, van Uffelen JGZ, Brown WJ. Occupational sitting time: employee’s perceptions of health risks and intervention strategies. Health Promot J Austr. 2011;22(1):38–43. doi: 10.1071/HE11038.
    1. Wallmann-Sperlich B, Bipp T, Bucksch J, Froboese I. Who uses height-adjustable desks?-Sociodemographic, health-related, and psycho-social variables of regular users. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017;14(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0480-4.
    1. Blacksher, Lovasi GS. Place-focused physical activity research, human agency, and social justice in public health: taking agency seriously in studies of the built environment. Health Place. 2012;18(2):172–179. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2011.08.019.
    1. Such E, Mutrie N. Using organisational cultural theory to understand workplace interventions to reduce sedentary time. Int J Health Promot Educ. 2017;55(1):18–29. doi: 10.1080/14635240.2016.1196382.
    1. Morgan-Trimmer S. Improving process evaluations of health behavior interventions: learning from the social sciences. Eval Health Prof. 2015;38(3):295–314. doi: 10.1177/0163278713497363.
    1. Chau J, Daley M, Srinivasan A, Dunn S, Bauman AE, van der Ploeg HP. Desk-based workers’ perspectives on using sit-stand workstations: a qualitative analysis of the Stand@Work study. BMC Public Health. 2014;14(1):752. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-752.
    1. Dutta N, Koepp GA, Stovitz SD, Levine JA, Pereira MA. Using sit-stand workstations to decrease sedentary time in office workers: a randomized crossover trial. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(7):6653–6665. doi: 10.3390/ijerph110706653.
    1. Graves L, Murphy R, Sheworkplace Brd S, Cabot J, Hopkins N. Evaluation of sit-stand workstations in an office setting: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):1145. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-2469-8.
    1. Grunseit AC, Chau J, van der Ploeg HP, Bauman AE. “Thinking on your feet”: a qualitative evaluation of sit-stand desks in an Australian workplace. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):365. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-365.
    1. Hadgraft N, Brakenridge C, Dunstan D, Owen N, Healy G, Lawler S. Perceptions of the acceptability and feasibility of reducing occupational sitting: review and thematic synthesis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2018;15(1):90. doi: 10.1186/s12966-018-0718-9.
    1. Johnson RB, Christensen L. Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. 3. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2008.
    1. Alvesson M. Understanding organizational culture. London: SAGE; 2002.
    1. Schein EH. Organisational Culture. American Psych. 1990;45(2):109–119.
    1. Tromp N, Hekkert P, Verbeek PP. Design for socially responsible behavior: a classification of influence based on intended user experience. Des Issues. 2011;27(3):3–19. doi: 10.1162/DESI_a_00087.
    1. Desmet P, Hekkert P. Framework of product experience. Int J Design. 2007;1(1):57–66.
    1. Saariluoma P, Jokinen JP. Emotional dimensions of user experience: a user psychological analysis. Int J Hum-Comput Int. 2014;30(4):303–320. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2013.858460.
    1. Hawe P, Shiell A, Riley T. Theorising interventions as events in systems. Am J Community Psychol. 2009;43(3):267–276. doi: 10.1007/s10464-009-9229-9.
    1. Michie S, Ashford S, Sniehotta FF, Dombrowski SU, Bishop A, French DP. A refined taxonomy of behaviour change techniques to help people change their physical activity and healthy eating behaviours: the CALO-RE taxonomy. Psychol Health. 2011;26(11):1479–1498. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2010.540664.
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2008;337:185–202.
    1. Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, Moore L, O’Cathain A, Tinati T, Wight D, Baird J. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. Br Med J. 2015;350:1258. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h1258.
    1. Sands RR. Sport ethnography. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2002.
    1. Spradley JP. Participant observation. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich; 1980.
    1. Hall J, Kay T, McConnell A, Mansfield L, et al. Int J Workplace Health Manag. 2019; ahead-of-print.
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
    1. Dunning E, Hughes J. Norbert Elias and modern sociology: knowledge, interdependence, power, process. 1. London: Bloomsbury Academic; 2013.
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2019;11(4):589–597. doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.
    1. Reckwitz A. Toward a theory of social practices: a development in culturalist theorizing. Eur J Soc Theory. 2002;5(2):243–263. doi: 10.1177/13684310222225432.
    1. Kosters M, Van der Heijden J. From mechanism to virtue: evaluating nudge theory. Evaluation. 2015;21(3):276–291. doi: 10.1177/1356389015590218.
    1. Chamorro-Koc M, Popovic V, Emmison M. Human experience and product usability: principles to assist the design of user–product interactions. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(4):648–656. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2008.05.004.
    1. Scott K, Bakker C, Quist J. Designing change by living change. Des Stud. 2012;33(3):279–297. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2011.08.002.
    1. Henderson B, Stuckey R, Keegel T. Current and ceased users of sit stand workstations: a qualitative evaluation of ergonomics, safety and health factors within a workplace setting. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1374. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-6296-6.
    1. Waters TR, Dick RB. Evidence of health risks associated with prolonged standing at work and intervention effectiveness. Rehabil Nurs. 2005;40(3):148–165. doi: 10.1002/rnj.166.
    1. Gardner B, Smith L, Mansfield L. How did the public respond to the 2015 expert consensus public health guidance statement on workplace sedentary behaviour? A qualitative analysis. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3974-0.
    1. Karakolis T, Callaghan JP. The impact of sit-stand office workstations on worker discomfort and productivity: a review. Appl Ergon. 2014;45(3):799–806. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.10.001.
    1. Hunter EM, Wu C. Give me a better break: choosing workday break activities to maximize resource recovery. J Appl Psychol. 2016;101(2):302. doi: 10.1037/apl0000045.
    1. Knight WB, Keifer-Boyd K, Amburgy PM. Revealing power: a visual culture orientation to student-teacher relationships. Stud Art Educ. 2004;45(3):270–273. doi: 10.1080/00393541.2004.11651773.
    1. Mansfield L, Hall J, Smith L, Rasch M, Reeves E, Dewitt S, Gardner B. “Could you sit down please?” A qualitative analysis of employees’ experiences of standing in normally-seated workplace meetings. PloS One. 2018;13(6):e0198483. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198483.
    1. Morgan-Trimmer S, Wood F. Ethnographic methods for process evaluations of complex health behaviour interventions. Trials. 2016;17(1):232. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1340-2.
    1. Golden SD, Earp JA. Social ecological approaches to individuals and their contexts: twenty years of health education & behavior health promotion interventions. Health Educ Behav. 2012;39(3):364–372. doi: 10.1177/1090198111418634.
    1. Wierenga D, Engbers LH, Van Empelen P, Duijts S, Hildebrandt VH, Van Mechelen W. What is actually measured in process evaluations for worksite health promotion programs: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):1190. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-1190.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel