Table 3 Barriers and facilitators to reducing workplace sitting across non-intervention and intervention studies
Non-intervention studies | Intervention studies | Quotes | |
|---|---|---|---|
Individual Level | Barriers | Barriers | |
- Sitting as a long-term habit – hard to change - Individual choice to remain sedentary - Being tired or standing perceived to be tiring/uncomfortable - Concern that reducing sitting equates to “standing all day” - Need to see a personal benefit (e.g. health benefit) - Competing priorities affecting behavioural change | - Habit/forgetting to change posture - Not being aware/able to estimate how much time is spent sitting - Individual preference in sitting/standing for different work tasks - Standing contributed to musculoskeletal discomfort. - Difficult concentrating when standing - Needing further instruction on how to engage with strategies - Need appropriate footwear for standing - Individual frustrations with strategies (see Strategy-specific barriers and facilitators) | Habit:“ ... I have the intention, but I forget to get up ...” Employee, intervention study [20] Individual choice: “I’ve gone from a standing up for 10 hours a day job, so I enjoy the sitting” Employee, non-intervention study [48] | |
Facilitators | Facilitators | ||
- Individual motivation or commitment - Feeling personal benefits from reducing sitting | - Individual motivation or personal challenge - Awareness of amount of time spent sitting - Sitting less becoming habitual - Experiencing health benefits from sitting less (such as reduced tiredness, greater concentration or alleviating musculoskeletal problems) - Perceived improvement in concentration/productivity - Having the choice and flexibility to change posture | Individual motivation: “I used to make a conscious effort to get up out of my desk, talk to people, interact. It comes down to the individual. It’s how you manage your workload on a daily basis.” Employee, non-intervention study [28] | |
Work-related | Barriers | Barriers | |
- Work requires the use of a computer (and seated posture) - Work has become more sedentary due to increasing use of technology - Some roles more sedentary than others - Employee/manager perception that taking breaks interrupts work flow/affects productivity - Perception that cognitive work requires people to be sitting down - Caught up in work – not noticing prolonged sitting - Home working and flexi-time strategies lead to more sitting - Shift work as a barrier to being active | - Screen based work - Some job roles not considered appropriate to perform standing (e.g. receptionist) - Some tasks difficult to perform standing - Work load and time pressures limit ability to take breaks or engage with strategies considered an “interruption” to work tasks - Perception that taking more breaks away from workstation equals not meeting demands of the job - Concern about privacy of work when standing | Computer-based work: “Today we sit down in front of that computer screen regularly for a good portion of a day to do training, to do reports, research whatever it may be, and so the number of hours your ass is in a chair has increased.” Employee, non-intervention study [21] Sitting breaks as interruption to work: “So much of my work relies on being sat at a computer which is unable to be addressed in a zero cost intervention”. Employee, intervention study [34] | |
Facilitators | Facilitators | ||
- Job tasks able to or required to be performed away from the desk (e.g. managerial duties) - Flexibility when breaks can be taken - Perceiving standing/moving to assist with tasks | - Having work tasks that could be performed walking - Flexibility with time (e.g. when breaks can be taken) | Job tasks: “We from time to time need to check things in the filing room so we need to get up and go there, but yeah, it’s maybe breaking up the job a bit more too. If we had, I guess, other tasks that involved getting up for a period of time that would probably help as well.” Employee, non-intervention study [12] | |
Social or organisational | Barriers | Barriers | |
- Not wanting to stand out - Concern about disturbing co-workers - Concern that standing or moving perceived as not working by colleagues and managers - Leaders not convinced about benefits of reducing sedentary behaviour - Workplace culture not supportive of initiatives to reduce sitting - Financial investment associated with sit-stand workstations - Culture encourages siloing and use of email. - Cultural issues: “Asian culture” perceives standing to be aggressive - OHS concerns relating to sit-stand workstations, physical activity, stairwell accessibility - OHS focus on treating issues rather than preventive health approach | - Concern colleagues perceive behaviour to be unusual - Concern about disturbing co-workers - Concern that colleagues/managers perceive standing or moving to be unproductive - Supervisor belief that sitting less reduces productivity - Not all levels of management supportive of intervention - Walking during breaks: less time for social interaction | Social norms: “So for me there are some hidden pressures, it’s not perceived to be good to be seen walking around unless you’ve got piece of A4 paper in your hand.” Employee, non-intervention study [45] Disturbing co-workers: “When I’m on the phone standing up I feel a little bit conscious because I feel like I’m shouting out across everyone and I’m sort of distracting people next to me.” Employee, intervention study [29] | |
Facilitators | Facilitators | ||
- Workplace culture where sitting less is the norm - Workplace culture supports regular short breaks - Group activities for motivation - Top down (manager, leadership) support and encouragement for sitting less, including permission for change - Having a workplace champion/role model who can motivate others and model behaviour - Organisation interest, investment and commitment in reducing sitting time - Wellbeing committee that meets regularly to discuss raising awareness and strategies - Support from OHS personnel - Having a reason to go and visit colleagues | - More supportive social norms for reducing sitting after intervention. - Involvement of co-workers in strategies helped to normalise standing/moving more - Managers providing permission - Management leading by example - Workplace champion driving change | Management permission: As soon as managers say, “If you want to stand, feel free to,” you can guarantee it there’ll be people immediately that will stand because managers have given them that permission to do it and therefore they’ve got the permission from everyone else to do it. Employee, intervention study [33] | |
Environmental | Barriers | Barriers | |
- Most furniture designed for sitting - Ergonomic issues with standing arrangements - Lack of common spaces away from desk - Stairs difficult to access/ - Lifts more convenient than stairs - Close proximity to co-workers – potential for disturbing others - Communal facilities close to desks - Lack of supportive facilities for activity (e.g. clothes iron) - Weather (heat) as a potential barrier to walking | - Activity-permissive workstations: issues with design (see strategy-specific barriers) - Open plan office: distractions, privacy issues - Weather (cold, rain) as barrier to walking | Furniture designed for sitting: “You really need higher tables to take notes or to take a look at your papers, you need to have these facilities otherwise people will sit if they have the opportunity” Executive, non-intervention study [13] | |
Facilitators | Facilitators | ||
- Provision of sit-stand workstations - Spaces within the building where people can go to take a break - Communal facilities (e.g. printers) located away from individual desks - Nice routes/nearby parkland for walking - Good weather to encourage walking | - Interesting/safe routes for walking around the office | Weather: “When the weather’s good, I go for a walk.” Employee, non-intervention study [57] | |
Strategy-specific barriers and facilitators | Barriers | ||
- Intervention emails: not read due to email overload - Activity-permissive workstations (e.g. sit-stand workstations and treadmill desks): unstable surface area, insufficient surface space to work, difficult to adjust monitor distance/workstation height (particularly if manual); inconvenient if only available at certain times of the day (e.g. hot desk arrangements); social hierarchies affected by height differential - Treadmill desks only: difficult to set up and noisy - Walking meetings: too many people in meetings - Lumoback activity tracker: comfort, difficult to wear with clothing, set up or syncing issues - Computer prompts: disruption to work flow | Sit-stand workstation design: “I thought it [the sit-stand workstation] was a really poor design. Just the way it bounced about and the screen kept moving and cords getting in the way and all this.” Employee, intervention study [31] | ||
Facilitators | |||
- Sit-stand workstations: allow work to continue while standing - Using prompts or triggers for activity-permissive workstation use (e.g. leaving desks in up position) - Activity trackers: allow monitoring of behaviour - Anti-fatigue mats to accompany sit-stand workstations |