Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 20;2018(6):CD010912. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010912.pub4
Methods Random allocation
Single‐blind
Study duration: 3 months
Dropout: 11%
Location: Australia
Recruitment: through posters and word‐of‐mouth
Participants Population: full‐time desk‐based employees in the Charlottetown area.
Intervention group: 16 participants
Control group: 12 participants
Demographics:
Mean age in years: intervention 43.2 (SD 9.7), control 48.9 (SD 11.4)
BMI: intervention group 36.5 (SD 9) kg/m², control group 34.6 (SD 7) kg/m²
Interventions Duration: 3 months
Intervention: sit‐stand desk
Control: no sit‐stand desk
Outcomes Outcome name, measurement time/tool (units of measurement)
  • Changes in sitting/standing/stepping time (minutes/8‐hour workday) measured at 12 weeks. Transitions in positions measured by activPAL3 accelerometer‐inclinometer

  • Weight (kg), waist circumference (cm), BMI, body fat %, estimated V02max (ml/min/kg), systolic and diastolic BP (mmHg), fasting blood lipids (Total cholesterol/HDL/LDL/Triglycerides) (mmol/L), glucose (mmol/L), HbA1c (%), aortic augmentation Index (%), subendocardial variability (%) at 12 weeks

Notes The project was supported by StepsCount, Inc
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Participants were randomly assigned via coin flip to intervention and control group.
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Not reported
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Not reported
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes Unclear risk Not reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes High risk Four participants were excluded from analysis (14% attrition).
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All outcomes mentioned in the study protocol were reported.
Baseline comparability/ imbalance High risk Participants in the control group were older (48.9 years, SD 11.4) than the intervention group (43.2 years, SD 9.7) and the intervention group had higher BMI (36.5 kg/m2, SD 9) than the control group (34.6 kg/m2 SD 7).
Validity of outcome measure Low risk activPal accelerometer is a valid instrument for assessing physical activity and sedentary behaviour