Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 20;2018(6):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub4
Methods Non‐random allocation by clusters (floor): CBA
Unblinded
Study duration: 3 months
Dropout: 14%
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Recruitment: an invitation email was sent to all potential participants to attend one of two 30‐minute study information sessions delivered by research staff. Participants who subsequently expressed interest were screened via telephone for eligibility.
Participants Population: from a single workplace (Comcare: the government agency responsible for workplace safety, rehabilitation and compensation for Australian government workplaces) in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia
Intervention group: 19 participants
Control group: 19 participants
Demographics: mean age 42.4 (SD 10.6) years in the intervention group and 42.9 (SD 10.3) years in the control group
Women were predominant in the intervention group and men were predominant in the control group.
Mean BMI (kg/m²): intervention group 27.5 (SD 6.1); control group 26.2 (SD 4.6)
Interventions Duration of intervention: 4 weeks
Intervention: the intervention communicated 3 key messages: “Stand Up, Sit Less, Move More” and had the following components:
  • organisational (a 45‐minute researcher‐led consultation with unit representatives from the intervention group and management followed by a workshop for all intervention participants);

  • environmental (installation of sit–stand desks); and

  • individual elements (30‐minute face‐to‐face consultation with each intervention participant, followed by 3 telephone calls (1/week)).


Control: no intervention
Outcomes Outcome name, measurement time/tool (units of measurement)
  • Sitting, standing, and moving at the workplace (minutes/8‐h workday) assessed by accelerometer‐inclinometer at baseline and their changes at 3‐month follow‐up

  • Weight (kg), waist circumference (cm), hip circumference (cm), fat free mass (kg), fat mass (kg), fasting blood lipids (mmol/L) and glucose (mmol/L) baseline vs. 3 months

  • Self‐reported health‐ and work‐related outcomes baseline vs. 3 months

    • Musculoskeletal symptoms by anatomical regions

    • Other health symptoms: eye strain, headaches, digestion problems, trouble walking, trouble sleeping, fatigue (1‐5 scale)

    • Work‐related outcomes ≥ 1 sick day (in the last month), > 1 day worked while suffering health problems (in the last month), work performance (1‐10 scale)

Notes This study was funded by an NHMRC project grant and the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. Ergotron provided the height‐adjustable desks (www.ergotron.com). No financial disclosures were reported by the authors and the authors declared that there were no conflicts of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) High risk Randomisation was not done.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) High risk Allocation into groups was by floor, with intervention participants (primarily administrative staff) working on the floor above the control participants (predominantly senior administrative staff).
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes High risk Research staff, participants, and assessors were not blinded to group allocation.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes High risk Assessors were not blinded to group allocation.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes Low risk 4 participants, 2 each from the intervention and control groups withdrew and 2 further participants, 1 each from the intervention and control groups were lost during follow‐up. As the same proportion of participants were excluded from both groups, the missing data did not have much impact on outcomes.
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes mentioned in the methods section were reported. The study protocol was not available.
Baseline comparability/ imbalance Low risk There were more women in the intervention group than in the control group. The mean age of both groups was similar. All participants were recruited from a single workplace in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia.
Validity of outcome measure Low risk The accelerometer is a valid instrument for the measurement of sitting time.