Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Apr;110(2):187-197.
doi: 10.17269/s41997-018-0170-2. Epub 2019 Jan 9.

Program implementation and effectiveness of a national workplace physical activity intervention: UPnGO with ParticipACTION

Erica Y Lau  1   2 , Guy Faulkner  3
Affiliations

Program implementation and effectiveness of a national workplace physical activity intervention: UPnGO with ParticipACTION

Erica Y Lau et al. Can J Public Health. 2019 Apr.

Abstract
in English, French

Intervention: UPnGO with ParticipACTION (UPnGO) is a 6-week workplace physical activity (PA) initiative aiming to increase habitual PA (steps) during the workday. Core intervention components included (1) self-monitoring of steps and action planning behaviours using a Web/mobile app with incentives and (2) organizational support, which included senior management's role modeling and endorsement of the program.

Research question: What is the effectiveness and levels of implementation of the UPnGO intervention? What is the relationship between effectiveness and levels of implementation?

Methods: A single-arm, pre-/post-test study design was used. Participants were 660 employees from nine organizations who had valid step data and complete socio-demographic information at baseline. The primary outcome (mean daily steps) was assessed by Garmin VivoFit. Using the usage data from the UPnGO web-based system, a composite score for levels of implementation was calculated based on participant's compliance with the self-monitoring component and senior management's role modeling. Associations of interest were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models.

Results: Levels of implementation were highly variable across organizations (mean = 68.22% ± 18.75, range = 19.8 to 100%). A significant Time × Implementation (IM) status interaction effect was observed. When stratified by IM status, a significant increase in mean daily steps at week 6 was found among participants in the high (β = 540.01 ± 202.69, p = 0.011) but not low (β = - 81.54 ± 291.96, p = 0.78) implementation group.

Conclusion: Findings suggest significant intervention effects in increasing average daily steps among participants who were exposed to optimal levels of implementation (~ 70%). UPnGO may be a scalable workplace PA intervention at a national level, although this needs further verification with more rigorous study designs.

Intervention: UPnGO with ParticipACTION (UPnGO) est une initiative d’activité physique (AP) en milieu de travail d’une durée de 6 semaines qui vise à augmenter l’AP habituelle (le nombre de pas) durant la journée de travail. Les éléments centraux de l’intervention étaient : 1) l’autosurveillance des pas et des comportements de planification d’actions avec une appli Web/mobile assortie d’incitations et 2) un appui organisationnel incluant l’exemple de la haute direction et son appui moral au programme.

Questions de recherche: Quelle est l’efficacité et quels sont les niveaux de mise en œuvre de l’intervention UPnGO? Quelle est la relation entre l’efficacité et les niveaux de mise en œuvre?

Méthode: Un protocole d’étude pré- et post-test sur groupe unique a été utilisé. Les participants étaient 660 employés de neuf organismes pour lesquels il existait au départ des données validées sur le nombre de pas et un profil sociodémographique complet. Le résultat principal (les pas moyens quotidiens) a été calculé avec l’appareil VivoFit de Garmin. À l’aide des données d’utilisation du système en ligne UPnGO, une note composite pour le niveau de mise en œuvre a été calculée d’après la conformité des participants à l’élément d’autosurveillance et l’exemple de la haute direction. Les associations intéressantes ont été analysées à l’aide de modèles linéaires à effets mixtes.

Résultats: Les niveaux de mise en œuvre ont beaucoup varié d’un organisme à l’autre (moyenne = 68,22 % ± 18,75, intervalle = 19,8 % à 100 %). Un effet d’interaction significatif Temps x Mise en œuvre (MEO) a été observé. Après stratification selon le statut de MEO, une hausse significative des pas moyens quotidiens a été constatée la 6e semaine chez les participants du groupe de mise en œuvre élevée (β = 540,01 ± 202,69, p = 0,011), mais non dans ceux du groupe où la mise en œuvre était faible (β = −81,54 ± 291,96, p = 0,78).

Conclusion: Ces résultats indiquent que l’intervention a eu des effets sensibles en augmentant les pas moyens quotidiens des participants exposés à des niveaux optimaux de mise en œuvre (~ 70 %). UPnGO pourrait être une intervention d’AP en milieu de travail extensible à l’échelle nationale, mais cela nécessiterait de plus amples vérifications avec des protocoles d’étude plus rigoureux.

Keywords: Implementation of health programs; Incentives; Telemedicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Changes in average daily steps over the intervention period in the total sample. Linear-mixed effect models adjusted for age and sex as covariates; individual and site as random effects. *Significantly different from baseline at p < 0.05. **Significantly different from baseline at p < 0.0001
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Changes in average daily steps over the intervention period stratified by implementation status. A composite score for levels of implementation was calculated for each participant by averaging the scores of three indicators: self-monitoring of steps, self-monitoring of action-planning activities, and senior management’s role modeling. Based on this score, participants were classified into two categories: low (≤ median score) and high (> median score)  implementation. Linear-mixed effect models adjusted for age and sex as covariates; individual and site as random effects. *Significantly different from baseline at p < 0.05. **Significantly different from baseline at p < 0.0001
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aittasalo M, Livson M, Lusa S, Romo A, Vaha-Ypya H, Tokola K, et al. Moving to business—changes in physical activity and sedentary behavior after multilevel intervention in small and medium-size workplaces. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):319. doi: 10.1186/s12889-017-4229-4.. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. An H-S, Jones GC, Kang S-K, Welk GJ, Lee J-M. How valid are wearable physical activity trackers for measuring steps? European Journal of Sport Science. 2017;17(3):360–368. doi: 10.1080/17461391.2016.1255261. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Andersen LL, Zebis MK. Process evaluation of workplace interventions with physical exercise to reduce musculoskeletal disorders. International Journal of Rheumatology. 2014;2014:761363. doi: 10.1155/2014/761363. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baerg S, Cairney J, Hay J, Rempel L, Mahlberg N, Faught BE. Evaluating physical activity using accelerometry in children at risk of developmental coordination disorder in the presence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Research in Developmental Disabilities. 2011;32(4):1343–1350. doi: 10.1016/j.ridd.2011.02.009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Behrens TK, Domina L, Fletcher GM. Evaluation of an employer-sponsored pedometer-based physical activity program. Perceptual and Motor Skills. 2007;105(3):968–976. doi: 10.2466/pms.105.3.968-976. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

Grants and funding