Summary of findings 9.
Multiple interventions for reducing sitting at work
| Multiple interventions versus no intervention for reducing sitting at work | ||||||
|
Patient or population: employees who sit at work Settings: workplace Intervention: multiple interventions Comparison: no intervention | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No of Participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| No intervention | Multiple environment interventions with or without counselling | |||||
| Time spent sitting at work Self‐reported questionnaires Follow‐up: median six months | The mean time spent sitting at work in the control group was 415 minutes/day5 | The mean time spent sitting at work in the intervention group was 61 minutes less (115 to 7 less) | 294 (1 study) |
⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 | ||
| Time spent sitting at work Self‐reported questionnaires Follow‐up: median 12 months | The mean time spent sitting at work in the control group was 415 minutes/day5 | The mean time spent sitting at work in the intervention group was 48 minutes less (103 less to 8 more) | 294 (1 study) |
⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2 | ||
|
Time spent sitting at work /8‐hour workday Activity log and accelerometer‐inclinometer Follow‐up: median 12 weeks |
The mean time spent in sitting at work in the control group was 370 minutes5 | The mean time spent in sitting at work in the intervention groups was 117 minutes less (168 to 67 less) | 25 (1 study) |
⊕⊕⊝⊝ very low3,4 | ||
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk Ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1 Risk of bias high due to un blinded outcome assessment and attrition bias, downgraded with one level
2 Imprecision with wide confidence intervals, downgraded with one level
3 Imprecision with wide confidence intervals, small sample size, downgraded with two levels
4 Lack of blinding of personnel, downgraded with one level
5 Sitting time in the control group