首页> 外文期刊>BMC Public Health >Impact of a workplace ‘sit less, move more’ program on efficiency-related outcomes of office employees
【24h】

Impact of a workplace ‘sit less, move more’ program on efficiency-related outcomes of office employees

机译:工作场所“少坐多动”计划对办公室员工效率相关结果的影响

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background Few studies have examined the impact of ‘sit less, move more’ interventions on workplace performance. This study assessed the short and mid-term impacts of and patterns of change within, a 19-week workplace web-based intervention (Walk@WorkSpain; W@WS; 2010–11) on employees′ presenteeism, mental well-being and lost work performance. Methods A site randomised control trial recruited employees at six Spanish university campuses ( n =?264; 42?±?10?years; 171 female), assigned by worksite and campus to an Intervention (IG; used W@WS; n =?129; 87 female) or an active Comparison group (A-CG; pedometer, paper diary and self-reported sitting time; n =?135; 84 female). A linear mixed model assessed changes between the baseline, ramping (8?weeks), maintenance (11?weeks) and follow-up (two months) phases for the IG versus A-CG on (i) % of lost work productivity (Work Limitations Questionnaire; WLQ); (ii) three scales for presenteeism (WLQ) assessing difficulty meeting scheduling demands (Time), performing cognitive and inter-personal tasks (Mental-Interpersonal) and decrements in meeting the quantity, quality and timeliness of completed work (Output); and (iii) mental well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale). T-tests assessed differences between groups for changes on the main outcomes. In the IG, a multivariate logistic regression model identified patterns of response according to baseline socio-demographic variables, physical activity and sitting time. Results There was a significant 2 (group)?×?2 (program time points) interaction for the Time (F [3]=8.69, p =?0.005), Mental-Interpersonal (F [3]=10.01, p =?0.0185), Output scales for presenteeism (F [3]=8.56, p =?0.0357), and for % of lost work performance (F [3]=10.31, p =?0.0161). Presenteeism and lost performance rose significantly in both groups across all study time points; after baseline performance was consistently better in the IG than in the A-CG. Better performance was linked to employees being more active (Time, p =?0.041) and younger (Mental-interpersonal, p =?0.057; Output, p =?0.017). Higher total sitting time during nonworking days (Mental-interpersonal, p =?0.019) and lower sitting time during workdays (WLQ Index, p =?0.013) also improved performance. Conclusion Versus an active comparison condition, a ‘sit less, move more` workplace intervention effectively reduced an array of markers of lost workday productivity. Trial registration NCT02960750 ; Date of registration: 07/11/2016.
机译:背景信息很少有研究研究“少坐多动”干预措施对工作场所绩效的影响。这项研究评估了为期19周的基于网络的工作场所干预(Walk @ WorkSpain; W @ WS; 2010-11)对员工的出勤率,心理健康和丧失感的短期和中期影响以及变革模式。工作表现。方法现场随机对照试验在西班牙的六个大学校园(n =?264; 42?±?10?年; 171名女性)中招募了雇员,由工作地点和校园分配给干预措施(IG;使用W @ WS; n =? 129名; 87名女性)或活跃的比较组(A-CG;计步器,纸质日记和自我报告的就座时间; n =?135; 84名女性)。线性混合模型评估了IG与A-CG在基线,爬坡(8周),维护(11周)和后续阶段(两个月)之间在(i)劳动生产率损失百分比(工作限制问卷; WLQ); (ii)呈现度法(WLQ)的三种量表,用于评估满足计划要求的难度(时间),执行认知和人际任务(精神-人际关系)和减少满足已完成工作的数量,质量和及时性(产出); (iii)心理健康(沃里克-爱丁堡心理健康量表)。 T检验评估了两组之间主要结果的差异。在IG中,多变量logistic回归模型根据基线社会人口统计学变量,体育活动和就座时间确定了反应模式。结果时间(F [3] = 8.69,p =?0.005),心理-人际关系(F [3] = 10.01,p =? 0.0185),代表出席率的产出量表(F [3] = 8.56,p =?0.0357)和丧失工作绩效的百分比(F [3] = 10.31,p =?0.0161)。在所有学习时间点上,两组的表现力和表现丧失显着增加。 IG的基线表现始终优于A-CG。更好的绩效与员工更积极(时间,p =?0.041)和更年轻(员工人际关系,p =?0.057;产出,p =?0.017)有关。在非工作日更长的总就座时间(精神上的人际关系,p =?0.019)和在工作日更低的总就座时间(WLQ指数,p =?0.013)也改善了绩效。结论与积极的比较条件,“少坐多动”的工作场所干预相比,有效地减少了工作日生产力损失的一系列指标。试用注册NCT02960750;注册日期:2016年7月11日。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号