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
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2019 Apr 24;19(1):427.
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6791-4.

Evaluation of an intervention to promote walking during the commute to work: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Suzanne Audrey  1   2 , Harriet Fisher  3 , Ashley Cooper  4 , Daisy Gaunt  5 , Kirsty Garfield  5 , Chris Metcalfe  5 , William Hollingworth  5 , Fiona Gillison  6 , Marie Gabe-Walters  7 , Sarah Rodgers  7 , Adrian L Davis  8 , Philip Insall  9 , Sunita Procter  3
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Evaluation of an intervention to promote walking during the commute to work: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Suzanne Audrey et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: Opportunities for working adults to accumulate recommended physical activity levels (at least 150 min of moderate intensity physical activity in bouts of at least 10 min throughout the week) may include the commute to work. Systematic reviews of interventions to increase active transport suggest studies have tended to be of poor quality, relying on self-report and lacking robust statistical analyses.

Methods: We conducted a multi-centre parallel-arm cluster randomised controlled trial, in workplaces in south-west England and south Wales, to assess the effectiveness of a behavioural intervention to increase walking during the commute. Workplace-based Walk to Work promoters were trained to implement a 10-week intervention incorporating key behavioural change techniques: providing information; encouraging intention formation; identifying barriers and solutions; goal setting; self-monitoring; providing general encouragement; identifying social support; reviewing goals, and; relapse prevention. Physical activity outcomes were objectively measured using accelerometers and GPS receivers at baseline and 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome was daily minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA). Secondary outcomes included overall levels of physical activity and modal shift (from private car to walking). Cost-consequences analysis included employer, employee and health service costs and outcomes.

Results: Six hundred fifty-four participants were recruited across 87 workplaces: 10 micro (5-9 employees); 35 small (10-49); 22 medium (50-250); 20 large (250+). The majority of participants lived more than two kilometres from their place of work (89%) and travelled to work by car (65%). At 12-month follow-up, 84 workplaces (41 intervention, 43 control) and 477 employees (73% of those originally recruited) took part in data collection activities. There was no evidence of an intervention effect on MVPA or overall physical activity at 12-month follow-up. The intervention cost on average £181.97 per workplace and £24.19 per participating employee.

Conclusions: The intervention, focusing primarily on individual behaviour change, was insufficient to change travel behaviour. Our findings contribute to the argument that attention should be directed towards a whole systems approach, focusing on interactions between the correlates of travel behaviour.

Trial registration: ISRCTN15009100 . Prospectively registered. (Date assigned: 10/12/2014).

Keywords: Active travel; Behavioural intervention; Physical activity; Randomised controlled trial; Walking; Workplace.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee at the University of Bristol. All workplaces and participants provided written consent for participation in the study.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

Suzanne Audrey is a member of the NIHR-PHR research funding board. Chris Metcalfe is a member of the NIHR-CTU funding board. William Hollingsworth is on the HTA clinical evaluation and trials board. Philip Insall is a member of the NIHR-PHR programme advisory board and is lead consultant with Insall & Coe active travel consulting. Adrian Davis is an independent consultant on health and transport.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow of workplaces and participants throughout the study
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Department of Health. Start active, stay active. A report on physical activity for health from the four home countries’ chief medical officers. London: Deparmtent of Health; 2011.
    1. Lee I-Min, Shiroma Eric J, Lobelo Felipe, Puska Pekka, Blair Steven N, Katzmarzyk Peter T. Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. The Lancet. 2012;380(9838):219–229. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61031-9. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Department of Health. UK physical activity guidelines. London: Deparmtent of Health; 2011.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services . Physical activity guidelines for Americans. 2. Washingto: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2018.
    1. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/hea... (accessed 31 Jan 2019).

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources