Search

Background: Wrist-worn data from commercially available devices has potential to characterize sedentary time for research and for clinical and public health applications. We propose a model that utilizes heart rate in addition to step count data to estimate the proportion of time spent being sedentary and the usual length of sedentary bouts., Methods: We developed and trained two Hidden semi-Markov models, STEPHEN (STEP and Heart ENcoder) and STEPCODE (STEP enCODEr; a steps-only based model) using consumer-grade Fitbit device data from participants under free living conditions, and validated model performance using two external datasets. We used the median absolute percentage error (MDAPE) to measure the accuracy of the proposed models against research-grade activPAL device data as the referent. Bland-Altman plots summarized the individual-level agreement with activPAL., Results: In OPTIMISE cohort, STEPHEN's estimates of the proportion of time spent sedentary had significantly (p < 0.001) better accuracy (MDAPE [IQR] = 0.15 [0.06-0.25] vs. 0.23 [0.13-0.53)]) and agreement (Bias Mean [SD]=-0.03[0.11] vs. 0.14 [0.11]) than the proprietary software, estimated the usual sedentary bout duration more accurately (MDAPE[IQR] = 0.11[0.06-0.26] vs. 0.42[0.32-0.48]), and had better agreement (Bias Mean [SD] = 3.91[5.67] minutes vs. -11.93[5.07] minutes). With the ALLO-Active dataset, STEPHEN and STEPCODE did not improve the estimation of proportion of time spent sedentary, but STEPHEN estimated usual sedentary bout duration more accurately than the proprietary software (MDAPE[IQR] = 0.19[0.03-0.25] vs. 0.36[0.15-0.48]) and had smaller bias (Bias Mean[SD] = 0.70[8.89] minutes vs. -11.35[9.17] minutes)., Conclusions: STEPHEN can characterize the proportion of time spent being sedentary and usual sedentary bout length. The methodology is available as an open access R package available from https://github.com/limfuxing/stephen/ . The package includes trained models, but users have the flexibility to train their own models., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: The online BeUpstanding™ program is an eight-week workplace-delivered intervention for desk-based workers to raise awareness of the benefits of sitting less and moving more and build a supportive culture for change. A workplace representative (the "champion") delivers the program, which includes a workshop where teams collectively choose their sit less/move more strategies. A toolkit provides the champion with a step-by-step guide and associated resources to support program uptake, delivery, and evaluation. Here we report on the main findings from the Australian national implementation trial of BeUpstanding., Methods: Recruitment (12/06/2019 to 30/09/2021) was supported by five policy and practice partners, with desk-based work teams from across Australia targeted. Effectiveness was measured via a single arm, repeated-measures trial. Data were collected via online surveys, toolkit analytics, and telephone calls with champions. The RE-AIM framework guided evaluation, with adoption/reach (number and characteristics); effectiveness (primary: self-reported workplace sitting time); implementation (completion of core components; costs); and, maintenance intentions reported here. Linear mixed models, correcting for cluster, were used for effectiveness, with reach, adoption, implementation, and maintenance outcomes described., Results: Of the 1640 website users who signed-up to BeUpstanding during the recruitment period, 233 were eligible, 198 (85%) provided preliminary consent, and 118 (50.6%) champions consented and started the trial, with 94% (n = 111 champions) completing. Trial participation was from across Australia and across industries, and reached 2,761 staff, with 2,248 participating in the staff survey(s): 65% female; 64% university educated; 17% from a non-English speaking background. The program effectively changed workplace sitting (-38.5 [95%CI -46.0 to -28.7] minutes/8-hour workday) and all outcomes targeted by BeUpstanding (behaviours and culture), with small-to-moderate statistically-significant effects observed. All participating teams (n = 94) completed at least 5/7 core steps; 72.4% completed all seven. Most champions spent $0 (72%) or >$0-$5 (10%) per team member; most (67/70 96%) intended to continue or repeat the program., Conclusions: BeUpstanding can be adopted and successfully implemented by a range of workplaces, reach a diversity of staff, and be effective at creating a supportive culture for teams of desk-based workers to sit less and move more. Learnings will inform optimisation of the program for longer-term sustainability., Trial Registration: ACTRN12617000682347., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Hip-worn accelerometers are commonly used, but data processed using the 100 counts per minute cut point do not accurately measure sitting patterns. We developed and validated a model to accurately classify sitting and sitting patterns using hip-worn accelerometer data from a wide age range of older adults., Methods: Deep learning models were trained with 30-Hz triaxial hip-worn accelerometer data as inputs and activPAL sitting/nonsitting events as ground truth. Data from 981 adults aged 35-99 years from cohorts in two continents were used to train the model, which we call CHAP-Adult (Convolutional Neural Network Hip Accelerometer Posture-Adult). Validation was conducted among 419 randomly selected adults not included in model training., Results: Mean errors (activPAL - CHAP-Adult) and 95% limits of agreement were: sedentary time -10.5 (-63.0, 42.0) min/day, breaks in sedentary time 1.9 (-9.2, 12.9) breaks/day, mean bout duration -0.6 (-4.0, 2.7) min, usual bout duration -1.4 (-8.3, 5.4) min, alpha .00 (-.04, .04), and time in ≥30-min bouts -15.1 (-84.3, 54.1) min/day. Respective mean (and absolute) percent errors were: -2.0% (4.0%), -4.7% (12.2%), 4.1% (11.6%), -4.4% (9.6%), 0.0% (1.4%), and 5.4% (9.6%). Pearson's correlations were: .96, .92, .86, .92, .78, and .96. Error was generally consistent across age, gender, and body mass index groups with the largest deviations observed for those with body mass index ≥30 kg/m 2 ., Conclusions: Overall, these strong validation results indicate CHAP-Adult represents a significant advancement in the ambulatory measurement of sitting and sitting patterns using hip-worn accelerometers. Pending external validation, it could be widely applied to data from around the world to extend understanding of the epidemiology and health consequences of sitting.

Background: Diet, exercise, and weight management are key in improving outcomes for breast cancer survivors, with international recommendations for cancer survivors relating to these behaviors. However, few behavioral interventions have reported outcomes aligned specifically with these recommendations., Objective: To evaluate a remotely delivered weight loss intervention vs usual care for female breast cancer survivors, on changes in multiple diet and physical activity behaviors., Design: A randomized controlled trial with assessments at study baseline, 6-, 12-, and 18 months (ie, mid-intervention, post-intervention, and non-contact follow-up)., Participants/setting: Participants were recruited between October 2012 and December 2014 through hospitals in Brisbane, Australia, and the state-based cancer registry. Eligible participants (women aged 18 to 75 years with body mass index 25 to 45 kg/m 2 who were diagnosed with stage I through III breast cancer during previous 2 years) were randomly allocated to intervention (n = 79) or usual care (n = 80)., Intervention: Participants randomized to the intervention group received 22 counseling telephone calls targeting diet and physical activity aimed at achieving 5% to 10% weight loss, and optional text messages, over 12 months. Usual care participants received their standard medical care and brief feedback following each assessment, which was similar to that provided to intervention participants with the exception that usual care participants' results were not compared with national and study recommendations., Main Outcome Measures: Dietary intake (24-hour recalls), physical activity (hip-worn GT3X+ accelerometer [Actigraph]), sitting time (thigh-worn activPAL3 [PAL Technologies Limited), and adherence to World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) recommendations for cancer survivors (0 to 7 score) were measured at each assessment, with data collected between November 2012 and October 2016., Statistical Analyses Performed: Intervention effects were assessed by linear mixed models, accounting for repeated measures and baseline values. Significance was set at P < 0.05., Results: At baseline, participants were aged 55 ± 9 years, with a body mass index of 31.4 ± 5.0 kg/m 2 , 10.7 ± 5.0 months postdiagnosis, and primarily non-minority. At baseline, only 8% (n = 12) of participants met ≥5 out of seven WCRF/AICR recommendations (WCRF/AICR adherence score = 3.8 ± 1.0). At 12 months, significant intervention effects were observed in walking/running (+21 minutes/week; 95% CI 4 to 38) and WCRF/AICR adherence scores (+0.3 points; 95% CI 0.0 to 0.6) only. At 18 months, significant intervention effects were observed for energy intake (-229 kcal/day energy; 95% CI -373 to -84), total fat (-10 g/day; 95% CI -18 to -2), and saturated fat (-5 g/day; 95% CI -9 to -1), and were sustained for WCRF/AICR adherence scores (+0.5 points; 95% CI 0.2 to 0.8)., Conclusions: This remotely delivered weight loss intervention led to sustained improvements in WCRF/AICR adherence scores, and some improvements in diet and physical activity. These findings provide support for the health benefit of programs targeting lifestyle behaviors in line with cancer survivor recommendations, and the potential for dissemination of such programs for women following treatment for early-stage breast cancer., (Copyright © 2022 Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Clinical practice guidelines recommend that adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) sit less and move more throughout the day. The 18-month OPTIMISE Your Health Clinical Trial was developed to support desk-based workers with T2D achieve these recommendations. The two-arm protocol consists of an intervention and control arms. The intervention arm receives 6 months health coaching, a sit-stand desktop workstation and an activity tracker, followed by 6 months of text message support, then 6 months maintenance. The control arm receives a delayed modified intervention after 12 months of usual care. This paper describes the methods of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the intervention, compared to a delayed intervention control., Methods: This is a two-arm RCT being conducted in Melbourne, Australia. Desk-based workers (≥0.8 full-time equivalent) aged 35-65 years, ambulatory, and with T2D and managed glycaemic control (6.5-10.0% HbA1c), are randomised to the multicomponent intervention (target n = 125) or delayed-intervention control (target n = 125) conditions. All intervention participants receive 6 months of tailored health coaching assisting them to "sit less" and "move more" at work and throughout the day, supported by a sit-stand desktop workstation and an activity tracker (Fitbit). Participants receive text message-based extended care for a further 6-months (6-12 months) followed by 6-months of non-contact (12-18 months: maintenance). Delayed intervention occurs at 12-18 months for the control arm. Assessments are undertaken at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 15 and 18-months. Primary outcomes are activPAL-measured sitting time (h/16 h day), glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c; %, mmol/mol) and, cognitive function measures (visual learning and new memory; Paired Associates Learning Total Errors [adjusted]). Secondary, exploratory, and process outcomes will also be collected throughout the trial., Discussion: The OPTIMISE Your Health trial will provide unique insights into the benefits of an intervention aimed at sitting less and moving more in desk-bound office workers with T2D, with outcomes relevant to glycaemic control, and to cardiometabolic and brain health. Findings will contribute new insights to add to the evidence base on initiating and maintaining behaviour change with clinical populations and inform practice in diabetes management., Trial Registration: ANZCTRN12618001159246 ., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background Emerging evidence suggests accruing sedentary behavior (SB) in relatively more prolonged periods may convey additional cardiometabolic risks, but few studies have examined prospective outcomes. We examined the association of SB accumulation patterns with incident cardiovascular disease (CVD), cancer, and all-cause mortality (ACM). Methods and Results Data were from 7671 EPIC-Norfolk (European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition-Norfolk) cohort middle- to older-aged adults who wore accelerometers on the right hip for 4 to 7 days. Cox proportional hazards regression modeled associations between 2 measures of SB accumulation and incident CVD, cancer, and ACM. These were usual SB bout duration (the midpoint of each individual's SB accumulation curve, fitted using nonlinear regression) and alpha (hybrid measure of bout frequency and duration, with higher values indicating relatively shorter bouts and fewer long bouts). Models were adjusted for potential confounders, then further for 24-hour time-use compositions. During mean follow-up time of 6.4 years, 339 ACM, 1106 CVD, and 516 cancer events occurred. Elevated rates of incident cancer and ACM were seen with more prolonged SB accumulation (lower alpha, higher usual SB bout duration) but not CVD. For usual SB bout duration and alpha, respectively, the confounder-adjusted hazard ratios per SD of the exposure were 1.12 (95% CI, 1.02-1.23) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.79-0.98) with incident cancer and 1.16 (95% CI, 1.07-1.26) and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.72-0.89) with ACM (all P <0.05). Further adjustment for 24-hour time use weakened associations with ACM for usual bout duration (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.97-1.16; P =0.209) and partially for alpha (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.99; P =0.029). Conclusions Accruing SB in longer bout durations was associated with higher rates of incident cancer and ACM but not with incident CVD, with some evidence of direct SB accumulation effects independent of 24-hour time use. Findings provide some support for considering SB accumulation as an adjunct target of messaging to "sit less and move more."

This cross-sectional study explored the objectively measured Touchscreen Mobile Device (TSMD) use in free-living conditions. Data on TSMD use, gross body posture (lying, sitting, standing, stepping), and location of use (workplace, home, other) were collected over seven consecutive days from 54 adults (mean ± SD, 38 ± 10 years). The average duration of TSMD use was 152 ± 91 min/day, with a TSMD engagement of 51 ± 35 times/day. Participants under 30 years spent significantly more time on their TSMD, averaging 230 ± 108 min/day. By location, 54 ± 17% of use occurred at home and 24 ± 15% at work. The most common posture adopted during any TSMD use was sitting (77 ± 5 2 min/day), with participants also spending considerable time lying down in the home environment (39 ± 49 min/day). These findings provide valuable insights into how adults are using TSMDs, including the postures and locations of use. Further research is needed on the health and wellbeing implications of these usage patterns. Practitioner summary: This study explored Touchscreen Mobile Device (TSMD) use in free-living conditions among 54 adults (mean ± standard deviation, 38 ± 10 years). Participants under 30 years spent significantly more time on their devices. More than half of the time spent using TSMD occurred at home while sitting and lying down. Abbreviations: TSMD: touchscreen mobile device; SD: standard deviation; MSD: musculoskeletal disorder; HDR: higher degree by research; SEES: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences; UK: The United Kingdom; USA: United States of America; SAS: statistical analysis system; ANOVA: analysis of variance; SPSS: statistical package for the social sciences; h: hour; min/d: minutes per day; d: day; ICC: intraclass correlation; CI: confidence interval; min: minute; GPS: global positioning systemsHighlightsTouchscreen mobile device use and gross body posture were quantified objectively.The most common postures for touchscreen mobile device use were lying and sitting.Touchscreen mobile devices were used around twice as much at home than at work.Use at home, with a predominance of the lying posture, needs further investigation.

Objectives: To develop and assess the measurement properties of self-report measures of accumulation of sitting time., Methods: Seven candidate measures were collected in 51 workers from three office environments (79% women) via online questionnaire administered immediately before and after 7-day monitoring periods (activPAL3 24-hour protocol with diary recorded work hours)., Results: Three measures had some validity (P < 0.05 vs activPAL): % of sitting in long bouts more than or equal to 30 minutes, sitting strategy frequency (0 to 100), and interruption rate (n/h sitting). Agreement was limited. Some reliability (intraclass correlation or kappa P < 0.05) was seen for these measures, strategy variety (0 to 100), typical day (five categories), and making a conscious effort to sit less (yes/no)., Conclusions: Two brief and one longer option may suit workplace studies requiring self-report measures of sitting accumulation. Validity was weaker for sitting accumulation than sitting time., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine.)

Purpose: To describe the frequency and characteristics (i.e., duration, stepping time, and estimated intensity) of all interruptions and physically active interruptions to adults' free-living sitting time (i.e., transitions from sitting to upright posture) across segments of the population., Methods: Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle study participants (321 men; 406 women; mean ± standard deviation, 58.0 ± 10.3 yr) wore the activPAL3™ for ≥1 valid day. The characteristics of interruptions from laboratory studies demonstrating health benefits were selected to define active interruptions (≥5 min upright and/or ≥2 min stepping) and ambulatory interruptions (≥2 min stepping). The frequency and characteristics of all, active, and ambulatory interruptions were described and compared by age, sex, diabetes status, and body mass index., Results: Adults averaged 55.0 ± 21.8 interruptions per day, but only 20.3 ± 6.7 were active and 14.0 ± 5.4 were ambulatory. Median (25th, 75th percentile) duration was 2.6 min (0.9, 7.8 min), stepping time was 0.8 min (0.3, 2.0 min), and estimated energy expenditure was 4.3 metabolic equivalents (MET)·min-1 (1.4, 12.5 MET·min-1). Those who were older, had obesity, or had diabetes had significantly (P < 0.05) fewer interruptions of all types and less stepping time during active interruptions than their counterparts (Cohen's d < 0.2)., Conclusions: Free-living interruptions were often less active than interruptions performed in effective acute laboratory studies and their content varied widely between population groups. Monitoring all interruptions, as well as those that are more active, is advisable to provide a comprehensive understanding of free-living sedentary behavior., (Copyright © 2021 by the American College of Sports Medicine.)

Limited evidence exists on the effects of weight loss on chronic disease risk and patient-reported outcomes in breast cancer survivors. Breast cancer survivors (stage I-III; body mass index 25-45 kg/m 2 ) were randomized to a 12-month, remotely delivered (22 telephone calls, mailed material, optional text messages) weight loss (diet and physical activity) intervention ( n = 79) or usual care ( n = 80). Weight loss (primary outcome), body composition, metabolic syndrome risk score and components, quality of life, fatigue, musculoskeletal pain, menopausal symptoms, fear of recurrence, and body image were assessed at baseline, 6 months, 12 months (primary endpoint), and 18 months. Participants were 55 ± 9 years and 10.7 ± 5.0 months post-diagnosis; retention was 81.8% (12 months) and 80.5% (18 months). At 12-months, intervention participants had significantly greater improvements in weight (-4.5% [95%CI: -6.5, -2.5]; p < 0.001), fat mass (-3.3 kg [-4.8, -1.9]; p < 0.001), metabolic syndrome risk score (-0.19 [-0.32, -0.05]; p = 0.006), waist circumference (-3.2 cm [-5.5, -0.9]; p = 0.007), fasting plasma glucose (-0.23 mmol/L [-0.44, -0.02]; p = 0.032), physical quality of life (2.7 [0.7, 4.6]; p = 0.007; Cohen's effect size ( d ) = 0.40), musculoskeletal pain (-0.5 [-0.8, -0.2]; p = 0.003; d = 0.49), and body image (-0.2 [-0.4, -0.0]; p = 0.030; d = 0.31) than usual care. At 18 months, effects on weight, adiposity, and metabolic syndrome risk scores were sustained; however, significant reductions in lean mass were observed (-1.1 kg [-1.7, -0.4]; p < 0.001). This intervention led to sustained improvements in adiposity and metabolic syndrome risk.

Background: The web-based BeUpstanding program supports desk workers to sit less and move more. Successfully translated from a research-delivered intervention, BeUpstanding has gone through iterative development and evaluation phases in preparation for wide-scale implementation. In the third planned "early-adopters" phase (01/09/2017-11/06/2019), the program was made freely-available online. An integrated delivery and evaluation platform was also developed to enable workplace champions to run and evaluate the intervention within their work team independent of researcher support. Using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework, this study reports on the extent to which the program and processes were "fit-for-purpose" for a national implementation trial across the indicators of uptake (reach and adoption), implementation and engagement, and effectiveness for behaviour change., Methods: Data were collected via the online surveys embedded in the program and through program access analytics. Descriptive data (with linearized variance for the clustered staff-level data) and results from mixed models (repeated data and clustering for pre-post changes) are reported., Results: Despite purposeful limited promotion, uptake was good, with 182 Australian users initially registering (208 total) and 135 (from 113 organisations) then completing the sign-up process. Recruitment reached users across Australia and in 16 of 19 Australian industries. Implementation was inconsistent and limited, with signed-up users completing 0 to 14 of the program's 14 steps and only 7 (5.2%) completing all seven core steps. Many champions (n = 69, 51.1%) had low engagement (1 day toolkit usage) and few (n = 30, 22%) were highly engaged (> 1 day toolkit usage and surveyed staff). Although only 18 users (7 organisations) performed the pre- and post-program staff evaluations (337 and 167 staff, respectively), pre-post changes showed the program effectively reduced workplace sitting by - 9.0% (95% CI -12.0, - 5.9%)., Discussion: The program had uptake across industries and across Australia, but implementation and engagement varied widely. Few workplaces completed the evaluation components. In those that did, the program was effective for the primary outcome (workplace sitting). Conducting a planned early adopters phase and a comprehensive evaluation according to RE-AIM helped highlight necessary program improvements to make it more suitable for wide-scale implementation and evaluation., Trial Registration: Australian and New Zealand Clinic Trials Registry ACTRN12617000682347 . Date registered: 12/05/2017., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Sedentary time (ST) and light-intensity physical activity (LIPA) are movement behaviours associated with important health outcomes, but are not widely explored in respiratory diseases. We aimed to describe their volume and/or accumulation patterns in moderate-severe COPD, bronchiectasis and severe asthma using the accurate postural-based accelerometer activPAL, contrasting these values with a non-respiratory population. We also sought to test the cross-sectional associations of these behaviours with disease characteristics by diagnostic group, and as a combined label-free disease group., Results: Adults with COPD (n = 64), bronchiectasis (n = 61), severe asthma (n = 27), and controls (n = 61) underwent cross-sectional measurements of volume and/or accumulation patterns of ST and LIPA. The prevalence and characteristics, and associations with exercise capacity, health-status, airflow-limitation, dyspnoea, systemic inflammation and exacerbations were analysed. ST volumes in COPD were higher than that of bronchiectasis and severe asthma. Values in bronchiectasis and severe asthma were similar to each other and controls (≈8.9 h/day). Their accumulation patterns were also significantly better than in COPD, but similar if not worse compared to controls. LIPA volumes in bronchiectasis and severe asthma were also higher than those of COPD (p < 0.05) and controls. In bronchiectasis and COPD, lower levels/better patterns of ST accumulation, as well as higher LIPA volume were associated with better clinical characteristics. These associations may be mediated by airflow limitation., Conclusions: The discordance between engagement in ST volume versus ST patterns highlights the importance of accounting for both these different yet complementary metrics. ST and LIPA are low-intensity activities associated with important clinical characteristics in people with chronic respiratory diseases., Trial Registration: Not applicable., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The web-based BeUpstanding Champion Toolkit was developed to support work teams in addressing the emergent work health and safety issue of excessive sitting. It provides a step-by-step guide and associated resources that equip a workplace representative-the champion-to adopt and deliver the 8-week intervention program (BeUpstanding) to their work team. The evidence-informed program is designed to raise awareness of the benefits of sitting less and moving more, build a supportive culture for change, and encourage staff to take action to achieve this change. Work teams collectively choose the strategies they want to implement and promote to stand up, sit less, and move more, with this bespoke and participative approach ensuring the strategies are aligned with the team's needs and existing culture. BeUpstanding has been iteratively developed and optimized through a multiphase process to ensure that it is fit for purpose for wide-scale implementation., Objective: The study aimed to describe the current version of BeUpstanding, and the methods and protocol for a national implementation trial., Methods: The trial will be conducted in collaboration with five Australian workplace health and safety policy and practice partners. Desk-based work teams from a variety of industries will be recruited from across Australia via partner-led referral pathways. Recruitment will target sectors (small business, rural or regional, call center, blue collar, and government) that are of priority to the policy and practice partners. A minimum of 50 work teams will be recruited per priority sector with a minimum of 10,000 employees exposed to the program. A single-arm, repeated-measures design will assess the short-term (end of program) and long-term (9 months postprogram) impacts. Data will be collected on the web via surveys and toolkit analytics and by the research team via telephone calls with champions. The Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance Framework will guide the evaluation, with assessment of the adoption/reach of the program (the number and characteristics of work teams and participating staff), program implementation (completion by the champion of core program components), effectiveness (on workplace sitting, standing, and moving), and maintenance (sustainability of changes). There will be an economic evaluation of the costs and outcomes of scaling up to national implementation, including intervention affordability and sustainability., Results: The study received funding in June 2018 and the original protocol was approved by institutional review board on January 9, 2017, with national implementation trial consent and protocol amendment approved March 12, 2019. The trial started on June 12, 2019, with 48 teams recruited as of December 2019., Conclusions: The implementation and multimethod evaluation of BeUpstanding will provide the practice-based evidence needed for informing the potential broader dissemination of the program., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12617000682347; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372843&isReview=true., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): DERR1-10.2196/15756., (©Genevieve Nissa Healy, Ana D Goode, Alison Abbott, Jennifer Burzic, Bronwyn K Clark, David W Dunstan, Elizabeth G Eakin, Matthew Frith, Nicholas D Gilson, Lan Gao, Lynn Gunning, Jodie Jetann, Anthony D LaMontagne, Sheleigh P Lawler, Marjory Moodie, Phuong Nguyen, Neville Owen, Leon Straker, Perri Timmins, Lisa Ulyate, Elisabeth A H Winkler. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 04.05.2020.)

Background: There is now a body of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions to reduce workplace sitting time. However, there has been limited reporting of how such interventions may impact behaviour both during and outside of work. Sitting, standing and stepping changes following a workplace intervention were examined across five timeframes (work time on work days; non-work time on work days; work days; non-work days; overall (i.e. work and non-work time on all days)), and the relationships between changes during and outside of work was assessed., Methods: The cluster-randomised controlled trial, 'Stand Up Victoria', delivered a multi-component workplace-delivered intervention that successfully reduced workplace and overall sitting time (relative to controls). Separately, over the five timeframes, changes in device (activPAL3)-assessed outcomes - sitting; prolonged sitting (≥30 min bouts); standing; and, stepping - were compared between intervention (n = 114) and controls (n = 84), along with the time-course of sitting changes during work hours, using mixed models. The potential relationships of changes during work with changes outside of work were examined using compositional data analysis., Results: On workdays, intervention participants significantly (p < 0.05) improved their activity profile relative to controls, with reduced sitting (- 117 min/8-h workday, 95% CI: - 141, - 93) and prolonged sitting (- 77 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: - 101, - 52); increased standing (114 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: 92, 136) and maintenance of stepping (3 min/8 h workday, 95% CI: - 7, 11, p = 0.576). Effects were nearly identical for time at work; similar but slightly weaker for overall; and, small and non-significant outside of work on workdays and non-work days. Improvements occurred at all times, but not equally, during work hours (p < 0.001). Correlations between changes during and outside of work on workdays were very weak in both the intervention group (r = - 0.07) and controls (r = - 0.09)., Conclusions: Sitting time was reduced almost exclusively during work hours (via replacement with standing), with reductions evident during all working hours, to varying degrees. There was no evidence of compensation, with minimal change in activity outside of work, in response to changes in activity at work. Future interventions may benefit from exploring how best to elicit change throughout the whole day, and across work and non-work domains., Trial Registration: This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials register (ACTRN12611000742976) on 15 July 2011.

Objective: This cross-sectional study examined the interrelationships between workplace movement (sitting, standing, and stepping), availability of discussion space, and face-to-face (FTF) interactions between workers., Methods: Desk-based workers (n = 221) wore an activity monitor for 7 days and self-reported their weekly frequency of FTF interactions and discussion space availability. Negative binomial regression models examined behavioral and spatial factors associated with the frequency of FTF interactions., Results: Adjusted for potential confounders, each one standard deviation increment in time spent sitting, standing, stepping, and discussion space availability was associated with 20% lower (P = 0.004), 19% higher (P = 0.003), 6% higher (P = 0.16), and 11% higher (P = 0.26) frequency of FTF interactions, respectively CONCLUSIONS:: Lower workplace sitting was often linked to reduced risk of chronic diseases. Our findings suggest that less sitting at work may have additional benefits of increasing informal interactions between office workers.

Background: High volumes of sitting time are associated with an elevated risk of type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and with adverse cardiometabolic risk profiles. However, previous studies have predominately evaluated only total sitting or television (TV) viewing time, limiting inferences about the specific cardiometabolic health impacts of sitting accumulated in different contexts. We examined associations of sitting time in four contexts with cardiometabolic risk biomarkers in Australian adults., Methods: Participants (n = 3429; mean ± SD age 58 ± 10 years) were adults without clinically diagnosed diabetes or cardiovascular disease from the 2011-2012 Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle (AusDiab) study. Multiple linear regressions examined associations of self-reported context-specific sitting time (occupational, transportation, TV-viewing and leisure-time computer use) with a clustered cardiometabolic risk score (CMR) and with individual cardiometabolic risk biomarkers (waist circumference, BMI, resting blood pressure, triglycerides, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, and fasting and 2-h post-load plasma glucose)., Results: Higher CMR was significantly associated with greater TV-viewing and computer sitting time (b [95%CI] = 0.07 [0.04, 0.09] and 0.06 [0.03, 0.09]), and tended to be associated with higher occupational and transport sitting time (0.01 [- 0.01, 0.03] and 0.03 [- 0.00, 0.06]), after adjustment for potential confounders. Furthermore, keeping total sitting time constant, accruing sitting via TV-viewing and computer use was associated with significantly higher CMR (0.05 [0.02, 0.08] and 0.04 [0.01, 0.06]), accruing sitting in an occupational context was associated with significantly lower CMR (- 0.03 [- 0.05, - 0.01]), while no significant association was seen for transport sitting (0.00 [- 0.03, 0.04]). Results varied somewhat between the respective biomarkers; however, higher sitting time in each domain tended to be associated detrimentally with individual biomarkers except for fasting glucose (non-significant associations) and systolic blood pressure (a beneficial association was observed). Overall, associations were stronger for TV-viewing and computer use, and weaker for occupational sitting., Conclusions: Higher context-specific sitting times tended to be detrimentally associated, albeit modestly, with CMR and several cardiometabolic risk biomarkers. There was some evidence suggesting that the context in which people sit is relevant above and beyond total sitting time. Methodological issues notwithstanding, these findings may assist in identifying priorities for sitting-reduction initiatives, in order to achieve optimal cardiometabolic health benefits.

Objective: To explore workers' sitting-reduction and activity-promoting strategy use following an intervention targeting these changes, and whether strategy use and perceived workplace support impacted on 3-month sitting and activity outcomes., Methods: This secondary analysis in desk-based workers (n = 83) utilized data collected on questionnaire-derived strategy use and workplace support, and activPAL3-derived sitting (total; prolonged, ≥30 minutes) and activity (standing; stepping) at work., Results: Fourteen strategies were commonly used during the intervention. Increased usage of some strategies were significantly (P < 0.05) associated with beneficial changes in prolonged sitting or stepping only. Workplace support was significantly beneficially associated with changes in sitting, prolonged sitting, and stepping; these associations were largely independent of strategy use changes., Conclusions: Strategies were highly used, with increased use associated with some behavioral improvements. Workplace support appears essential for improving sitting and activity in the workplace.

Background: Large amounts of sitting at work have been identified as an emerging occupational health risk, and findings from intervention trials have been reported. However, few such reports have examined participant-selected strategies and their relationships with behaviour change., Methods: The Stand Up Victoria cluster-randomised controlled trial was a workplace-delivered intervention comprising organisational, environmental and individual level behaviour change strategies aimed at reducing sitting time in desk-based workers. Sit-stand workstations were provided, and participants (n = 134; intervention group only) were guided by health coaches to identify strategies for the 'Stand Up', 'Sit Less', and 'Move More' intervention targets, including how long they would stand using the workstation. Three-month workplace sitting and activity changes (activPAL3-assessed total sitting, prolonged sitting (i.e., sitting ≥30 min continuously) and purposeful walking) were evaluated in relation to the number (regression analysis) and types of strategies (decision-tree analysis)., Results: Over 80 different strategies were nominated by participants. Each additional strategy nominated for the 'Stand Up' intervention target (i.e. number of strategies) was associated with a reduction in prolonged sitting of 27.6 min/8-h workday (95% CI: -53.1, - 2.1, p = 0.034). Types of strategies were categorised into 13 distinct categories. Strategies that were task-based and phone-based were common across all three targets. The decision tree models did not select any specific strategy category as predicting changes in prolonged sitting ('Stand Up'), however four strategy categories were identified as important for total sitting time ('Sit Less') and three strategy categories for purposeful walking ('Moving More'). The uppermost nodes (foremost predictors) were nominating > 3 h/day of workstation standing (reducing total workplace sitting) and choosing a 'Move More' task-based strategy (purposeful walking)., Conclusions: Workers chose a wide range of strategies, with both strategy choice and strategy quantity appearing relevant to behavioural improvement. Findings support a tailored and pragmatic approach to encourage a change in sitting and activity in the workplace. Evaluating participant-selected strategies in the context of a successful intervention serves to highlight options that may prove feasible and effective in other desk-based workplace environments., Trial Registration: This trial was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials register ( ACTRN12611000742976 ) on 15 July 2011.

This paper explores changes in musculoskeletal pain among desk-based workers over three months of a workplace-delivered, sitting-reduction intervention. Participants ( n = 153, 46% female; mean ± SD aged 38.9 ± 8.0 years) were cluster-randomized ( n = 18 work teams) to receive an organizational change intervention, with or without an activity tracker. A modified Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire assessed pain intensity (0⁻9; none⁻worst possible) in the neck, upper and lower back, upper and lower extremities, and in total. The activPAL3 (7 days, 24 h/day protocol) measured sitting and prolonged sitting in ≥30 min bouts at work. Mixed models adjusting for cluster and intervention arm examined changes in pain ( n = 104), and their associations with reductions in sitting and prolonged sitting (h/10 h at work) ( n = 90). Changes in pain were nonsignificant ( p ≥ 0.05) and small for total pain (-0.06 [95% CI: -0.27, 0.16]) and for each body area (-0.26 [-0.66, 0.15] for upper back to 0.09 [-0.39, 0.56] for lower back). Sitting reduction was associated with reduced lower back pain (-0.84 [-1.44, -0.25] per hour, p = 0.005); other effects were small and non-significant. No substantial average changes in pain were seen; some improvement in lower back pain might be expected with larger sitting reductions. Larger samples and diverse interventions are required for more definitive evidence.

We examined the association of musculoskeletal symptoms (MSS) with workplace sitting, standing and stepping time, as well as sitting and standing time accumulation (i.e. usual bout duration of these activities), measured objectively with the activPAL3 monitor. Using baseline data from the Stand Up Victoria trial (216 office workers, 14 workplaces), cross-sectional associations of occupational activities with self-reported MSS (low-back, upper and lower extremity symptoms in the last three months) were examined using probit regression, correcting for clustering and adjusting for confounders. Sitting bout duration was significantly (p < 0.05) associated, non-linearly, with MSS, such that those in the middle tertile displayed the highest prevalence of upper extremity symptoms. Other associations were non-significant but sometimes involved large differences in symptom prevalence (e.g. 38%) by activity. Though causation is unclear, these non-linear associations suggest that sitting and its alternatives (i.e. standing and stepping) interact with MSS and this should be considered when designing safe work systems. Practitioner summary: We studied associations of objectively assessed occupational activities with musculoskeletal symptoms in office workers. Workers who accumulated longer sitting bouts reported fewer upper extremity symptoms. Total activity duration was not significantly associated with musculoskeletal symptoms. We underline the importance of considering total volumes and patterns of activity time in musculoskeletal research.

High levels of sedentary time have been detrimentally linked to health outcomes. Differentiating sitting from lying may help to further understand the mechanisms associated with these health impacts. This study compares the inter-method agreement between the "single-monitor" method (thigh-worn activPAL 3 TM ) and a more robustly validated "dual-monitor" method (trunk and thigh-worn activPAL 3 TM ) in their classifications of sitting and lying under free-living conditions. Thirty-five participants (20-50 years) wore two activity monitors (thigh and trunk) for 24 hours. Total time spent lying and sitting was calculated for both methods, and agreement was determined using ICC and Bland-Altman methods. As there was no gold standard, further data were collected from five participants during structured activities that were designed to challenge classification, to better understand any disagreement between the methods. ICCs were 0.81 for sitting time and 0.64 for lying time. The single-monitor method detected less lying time than the dual-monitor method, with a mean difference of -25 minutes (95% agreement limits: -172 to 221 minutes), including three cases with extreme disagreement (mostly in daytime lying classification). The additional data collection suggested a major source of disagreement was failure of the single-monitor method to identify lying that involved no rotation around the longitudinal axis. In conclusion, there was some agreement between the single- and dual-monitor estimates of lying time under free-living conditions, but measures were not interchangeable. The main disagreement was in how the methods classified daytime lying and lying tasks involving no lateral movement. Both methods yield promise for measuring time in bed., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The socioecological model proposes a wide array of factors that influence behaviours. There is a need to understand salient correlates of these activity behaviours in a specific population. However, few studies identified socio-demographic, behavioural, physical, and psychological correlates of objectively-assessed physical activity and sedentary time in young adults., Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis of participants in the Raine Study (a pregnancy cohort started in 1989). Australian young adults (mean 22.1 years ± SD 0.6) wore Actigraph GT3X+ accelerometers on the hip 24 h/day for seven days to assess moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) and sedentary time (n = 256 women, n = 219 men). Potential correlates were assessed via clinical assessment and questionnaire and included socio-demographic variables (ethnicity, relationship status, work/study status, education, mothers education), health behaviours (food intake, alcohol consumption, smoking status, sleep quality), and physical and psychological health aspects (anthropometrics, diagnosed disorders, mental health, cognitive performance). Backwards elimination (p < 0.2 for retention) with mixed model regressions were used and the gender-stratified analyses were adjusted for demographic variables, waking wear time and number of valid days., Results: Increased time spent in MVPA was associated with: being single (IRR 1.44 vs in a relationship living together, 95%CI: 1.17, 1.77, p = .001) in women; and better sleep quality in men (lower scores better IRR 0.97, 95%CI: 0.93, 1.00). Less time spent sedentary was associated with: lower mother's education (- 32.1 min/day, 95%CI -52.9, 11.3, p = 0.002 for having mother with no university degree vs at least a baccalaureate degree) and smoking (- 44.3 min/day, 95%CI: - 72.8, - 15.9, p = .0002) for women; lower education status (- 32.1 min/day, 95%CI: -59.5, - 4.8, p = 0.021 for having no university degree vs at least a baccalaureate degree) and lower depression scores in men (- 2.0, 95%CI: - 3.5, - 0.4, p = 0.014); more alcoholic drinks per week for women (- 1.9 min/day, 95%CI: -3.1, - 0.6, p = 0.003) and men (- 1.0, 95%CI: -1.8, - 0.3, p = 0.007)., Conclusions: Less desirable correlates were associated with positive levels of activity in young Australian adult women and men. Interventions to increase MVPA and decrease sedentary activity in young adults need to specifically consider the life stage of young adults.

Prolonged uninterrupted sitting is related adversely to cardiometabolic risk markers and postprandial hyperglycaemia, relative to sitting interrupted by regular brief activity breaks. However, whether the magnitude of hyperglycaemic responses to prolonged sitting is dependent upon the underlying degree of insulin resistance remains unclear. Data were pooled from 3 randomized cross-over laboratory-based trials (n = 62) that examined the postprandial blood glucose- and insulin-lowering effects of prolonged sitting vs sitting interrupted by regular brief activity breaks in overweight/obese adults who had normal or impaired glucose metabolism (2 trials) or type 2 diabetes not treated by insulin (1 trial). Corrected for study effects, the magnitude of differences in postprandial glucose and insulin responses between the 2 conditions was significantly exacerbated with poorer baseline levels of fasting glucose, insulin and/or surrogate markers of β-cell function and insulin resistance. This suggests that those with higher underlying levels of insulin resistance may derive greater metabolic benefits from regularly interrupting prolonged sitting than their healthier counterparts. If these findings can be replicated, they may have implications for future targeting and optimization of physical activity/sedentary behaviour interventions in the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: According to cross-sectional and acute experimental evidence, reducing sitting time should improve cardiometabolic health risk biomarkers. Furthermore, the improvements obtained may depend on whether sitting is replaced with standing or ambulatory activities. Based on data from the Stand Up Victoria multicomponent workplace intervention, we examined this issue using compositional data analysis-a method that can examine and compare all activity changes simultaneously., Methods: Participants receiving the intervention (n = 136 ≥ 0.6 full-time equivalent desk-based workers, 65% women, mean ± SD age = 44.6 ± 9.1 yr from seven worksites) were asked to improve whole-of-day activity by standing up, sitting less, and moving more. Their changes in the composition of daily waking hours (activPAL-assessed sitting, standing, and stepping) were quantified then tested for associations with concurrent changes in cardiometabolic risk (CMR) scores and 14 biomarkers concerning body composition, glucose, insulin, and lipid metabolism. Analyses were by mixed models, accounting for clustering (3 months, n = 105-120; 12 months, n = 80-97)., Results: Sitting reduction was significantly (P < 0.05) associated only with lower systolic blood pressure at 3 months, and with CMR scores, weight, body fat, waist circumference, diastolic blood pressure, and fasting triglycerides, total/HDL cholesterol, and insulin at 12 months. Significant differences between standing and stepping were only observed for systolic blood pressure and insulin; both favored stepping. However, replacing sitting with standing was significantly associated only with improvements in CMR scores, whereas replacing sitting with stepping was significantly associated with CMR scores and six biomarkers., Conclusions: Improvements in several cardiometabolic health risk biomarkers were significantly associated with sitting reductions that occurred in a workplace intervention. The greatest degree and/or widest range of cardiometabolic benefits appeared to occur with long-term changes, and when increasing ambulatory activities., Trial Registration: ACTRN1211000742976.

Purpose: To evaluate the initial and long-term impacts on cardiometabolic health indicators of the Stand Up Victoria intervention-a 12-month, multicomponent workplace-delivered intervention that successfully reduced overall sitting time, primarily by increasing standing time., Methods: Office worksites (≥1 km apart) from a single organization were cluster randomized to intervention (n = 7) or control (n = 7). Participants were 136 intervention and 95 control desk-based workers (5-39 per worksite; 68% women; mean ± SD age = 45.6 ± 9.4 yr). Outcomes, assessed at baseline (0 months), 3, and 12 months, were 14 individual biomarkers of body composition, blood pressure, glucose metabolism, lipid metabolism, and a composite overall cardiometabolic risk score. Intervention effects were assessed by linear mixed models, accounting for repeated measures and clustering, baseline values, and potential confounders. Missing data were multiply imputed. Significance was set at P < 0.05, two-tailed., Results: No significant intervention effects were observed at 3 months. Significant effects, favoring intervention, were observed at 12 months for fasting glucose (-0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.65 to -0.03; P = 0.028 mmol·L) and the overall cardiometabolic risk score (-0.11, 95% CI, -0.29 to -0.00; P = 0.046). Other intervention effects were typically weakly in favor of the intervention group, but were nonsignificant and estimated with wide CI., Conclusions: In "healthy" workers (not selected as having any specific health condition), a workplace intervention showed a small benefit for improving biomarkers of cardiometabolic risk, but only with 12 months of intervention and not for all biomarkers. Long-term facilitation of movement and standing at work may be a useful approach to reducing cardiovascular disease risk in the working population. The potential benefits for workers at high risk for cardiovascular disease (e.g., with diabetes) may be even greater and merit investigation.

Objectives: Initiatives to reduce office-workplace sitting are proliferating, but the impact of pre-existing musculoskeletal symptoms on their effectiveness has not been determined. We assessed the influence of musculoskeletal symptoms on the outcomes of a workplace sitting intervention., Methods: Baseline and 3-month data from a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a workplace sitting intervention (Stand Up Victoria; trial registration number ACTRN12611000742976) were used. Office workers (n = 231) from 14 work teams within one organisation were randomised (by worksite) to a multicomponent program with individual-, organisational-, and environmental-level (sit-stand workstations) change strategies; or, to a control condition (no intervention). Musculoskeletal symptoms in the low-back, upper and lower extremities (present/absent) were assessed through self-report. Linear regression models tested the moderation by baseline musculoskeletal symptoms of intervention effects on workplace sitting and standing time and on sitting and standing bout durations, assessed by the activPAL3™ activity monitor., Results: There were significant reductions in sitting and increased standing at work (p < 0.05). However, effects varied significantly by the presence of pre-existing low-back (but not other) symptoms, with greater benefit being seen in those without symptoms. Effects on sitting time and sitting bout duration were weaker in those with low-back symptoms compared to those without by 34.6 [95% CI (0.9; 68.3)] min/8-h workday and 5.1 [95% CI (0.2; 9.9)] min, respectively. Comparable effects were seen for standing., Conclusion: Low-back symptoms may impact on the extent to which office workers change their workplace sitting and standing time. A prudent next step to improve the effectiveness of workplace sitting-reduction initiatives such as Stand Up Victoria may be to assess and address the needs of those who displayed comparatively limited behaviour change, namely those with pre-existing low-back discomfort.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2016.06.011.].

Background: High amounts of time spent sitting can increase cardiovascular disease risk and are deleteriously associated cardio-metabolic risk biomarkers. Though evidence suggests that accruing sitting time in prolonged periods may convey additional risk, verification using high-quality measures is needed. We examined this issue in adults from the Australian Diabetes, Obesity and Lifestyle Study, using accurate measures of sitting accumulation., Methods: In 2011/12, 739 adults aged 36 to 89 years (mean±SD 58±10 years) wore activPAL3™ monitors (which provide accurate objective measures of sitting); 678 provided ≥4 valid days of monitor data and complete cardio-metabolic biomarker and confounder data. Multivariable linear regression models examined associations of sitting time, sitting time accrued in ≥30 minute bouts (prolonged sitting time), and three measures of sitting accumulation patterns with cardio-metabolic risk markers: body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure, high- and low- density lipoprotein (HDL and LDL) cholesterol, triglycerides, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2-hour post-load glucose (PLG). Interactions tests examined whether associations of sitting time with biomarkers varied by usual sitting bout duration., Results: Adjusted for potential confounders, greater amounts of sitting time and prolonged sitting time were significantly (p<0.05) deleteriously associated with BMI, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides. Total sitting time was also significantly associated with higher PLG. Sitting accumulation patterns of frequently interrupted sitting (compared to patterns with relatively more prolonged sitting) were significantly beneficially associated with BMI, waist circumference, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, PLG, and with FPG. Effect sizes were typically larger for accumulation patterns than for sitting time. Significant interactions (p<0.05) showed that associations of sitting time with HDL, triglycerides and PLG became more deleterious the longer at a time sitting was usually accumulated., Conclusions: Adding to previous evidence reliant on low-quality measures, our study showed that accumulating sitting in patterns where sitting was most frequently interrupted had significant beneficial associations with several cardio-metabolic biomarkers and that sitting for prolonged periods at a time may exacerbate some of the effects of sitting time. The findings support sedentary behavior guidelines that promote reducing and regularly interrupting sitting.

Research indicates that high levels of sedentary behavior (sitting or lying with low energy expenditure) are adversely associated with health. A key factor in improving our understanding of the impact of sedentary behavior (and patterns of sedentary time accumulation) on health is the use of objective measurement tools that collect date and time-stamped activity information. One such tool is the activPAL monitor. This thigh-worn device uses accelerometer-derived information about thigh position to determine the start and end of each period spent sitting/lying, standing, and stepping, as well as stepping speed, step counts, and postural transitions. The activPAL is increasingly being used within field-based research for its ability to measure sitting/lying via posture. We summarise key issues to consider when using the activPAL in physical activity and sedentary behavior field-based research with adult populations. It is intended that the findings and discussion points be informative for researchers who are currently using activPAL monitors or are intending to use them. Pre-data collection decisions, monitor preparation and distribution, data collection considerations, and manual and automated data processing possibilities are presented using examples from current literature and experiences from 2 research groups from the UK and Australia.