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
Meta-Analysis
. 2024 Apr 19;21(1):41.
doi: 10.1186/s12966-024-01595-6.

Effectiveness of workplace interventions with digital elements to reduce sedentary behaviours in office employees: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Iris Parés-Salomón  1 , Anna M Señé-Mir  2 , Fernando Martín-Bozas  3 , Bette Loef  4 , Alan Coffey  5 , Kieran P Dowd  5 , Guillem Jabardo-Camprubí  6 , Karin I Proper  4   7 , Anna Puig-Ribera  1 , Judit Bort-Roig  1
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of workplace interventions with digital elements to reduce sedentary behaviours in office employees: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Iris Parés-Salomón et al. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. .

Abstract

Background: Digital interventions are potential tools for reducing and limiting occupational sedentary behaviour (SB) in sedentary desk-based jobs. Given the harmful effects of sitting too much and sitting for too long while working, the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the effectiveness of workplace interventions, that incorporated digital elements, to reduce the time spent in SB in office workers.

Methods: Randomised control trials that evaluated the implementation of workplace interventions that incorporated digital elements for breaking and limiting SB among desk-based jobs were identified by literature searches in six electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO and PEDro) published up to 2023. Studies were included if total and/or occupational SB were assessed. Only studies that reported pre- and postintervention mean differences and standard deviations or standard errors for both intervention arms were used for the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5; Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Risk of bias was assessed using the Standard Quality Assessment Criteria for Evaluating Primary Research Papers from a Variety of Fields QUALSYST tool.

Results: Nineteen studies were included in the systematic review. The most employed digital elements were information delivery and mediated organisational support and social influences. Multicomponent, information, and counselling interventions measuring total and/or occupational/nonoccupational SB time by self-report or via device-based measures were reported. Multicomponent interventions were the most represented. Eleven studies were included in the meta-analysis, which presented a reduction of 29.9 (95% CI: -45.2, -14.5) min/8 h workday in SB (overall effect: Z = 3.81).

Conclusions: Multicomponent interventions, using a wide range of digital features, have demonstrated effectiveness in reducing time spent in SB at the workplace among desk-based employees. However, due to hybrid work (i.e., work in the office and home) being a customary mode of work for many employees, it is important for future studies to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of these interventions in the evolving work landscape.

Trial registration: The review protocol was registered in the Prospero database (CRD42022377366).

Keywords: Home-office; Office work; Sedentary behaviour; Technology; Teleworking; Workplace.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could influence the work reported in this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the study selection process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Total sedentary behaviour reductions (min/8 h workday)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Digital interventions (min/8 h workday)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Sub-analysis sedentary behaviour reductions (min/8 h workday)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Device-based measures of sedentary behaviour reductions (min/8 h workday)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Hendriksen IJM, Bernaards CM, Steijn WMP, Hildebrandt VH. Longitudinal relationship between sitting time on a working day and vitality, work performance, presenteeism, and sickness absence. J Occup Environ Med. 2016;58(8):784–789. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000809. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Clemes SA, O’Connell SE, Edwardson CL. Office workers’ objectively measured sedentary behavior and physical activity during and outside working hours. J Occup Environ Med. 2014;56(3):298–303. doi: 10.1097/JOM.0000000000000101. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Waters CN, Ling EP, Chu AHY, Ng SHX, Chia A, Lim YW, et al. Assessing and understanding sedentary behaviour in office-based working adults: a mixed-method approach. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:360. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-3023-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Puig-Ribera A, Martínez-Lemos I, Giné-Garriga M, González-Suárez ÁM, Bort-Roig J, Fortuño J, Muñoz-Ortiz L, McKenna J, Gilson ND. Self-reported sitting time and physical activity: interactive associations with mental well-being and productivity in office employees. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:72. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1447-5. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Oakman J, Kinsman N, Stuckey R, Graham M, Weale V. A rapid review of mental and physical health effects of working at home: how do we optimise health? BMC Public Health. 2020;20(1):1825. doi: 10.1186/s12889-020-09875-z. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Grants and funding