Evaluating a multi-component intervention to reduce and break up office workers' sitting with sit-stand desks using the APEASE criteria

Marsha L Brierley; Lindsey R Smith; Daniel P Bailey; Samson O Ojo; David J Hewson; Sofie A Every; Taylor A Staines; Angel M Chater

doi:10.1186/s12889-022-12794-w

Evaluating a multi-component intervention to reduce and break up office workers' sitting with sit-stand desks using the APEASE criteria

BMC Public Health. 2022 Mar 7;22(1):458. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-12794-w.

Authors

Marsha L Brierley^{1

2

3}, Lindsey R Smith¹, Daniel P Bailey^{1

2

3}, Samson O Ojo^{4

5}, David J Hewson⁴, Sofie A Every^{2

3}, Taylor A Staines¹, Angel M Chater^{6

7}

Affiliations

¹ Institute for Sport and Physical Activity Research, School of Sport Science and Physical Activity, University of Bedfordshire, Polhill Avenue, Bedford, MK41 9EA, UK.
² Division of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK.
³ Centre for Physical Activity in Health and Disease, Brunel University London, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK.
⁴ Institute for Health Research, University of Bedfordshire, University Square, Luton, LU1 3JU, UK.
⁵ Quality Improvement, Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust, Cliftonville, Northampton, Northamptonshire, NN1 5BD, UK.
⁶ Institute for Sport and Physical Activity Research, School of Sport Science and Physical Activity, University of Bedfordshire, Polhill Avenue, Bedford, MK41 9EA, UK. angel.chater@beds.ac.uk.
⁷ Centre for Behaviour Change, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, WC1E 7HB, UK. angel.chater@beds.ac.uk.

Abstract

Objective: Sedentary workplace interventions have had success in reducing excessive sitting time in office workers, but barriers to implementation and uptake remain. This study formally assessed a theory-derived, sit-stand desk intervention using the APEASE (Acceptability, Practicability, Effectiveness, Affordability, Side-effects, Equity) criteria.

Methods: Thirteen adults (eight female, mean age 38 ± 10 years) from the treatment arm of a sedentary behaviour intervention participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic codes were inductively assigned to data items followed by deductive charting using the APEASE criteria.

Results: The intervention was highly acceptable, practicable, safe to deploy, and helped workers reduce workplace sitting time, though individual preferences and workload mediated engagement. Affordability of sit-stand desks and Equity of access were potential barriers to uptake.

Conclusions: Through the lens of the APEASE criteria, this theory-derived, multi-component sit-stand desk intervention showed acceptability, practicability and effectiveness in reducing and breaking up sedentary time at work with minimal side effects. Using this approach with further tailoring and personalisation may help workers achieve greater reductions in workplace sitting, though affordability and equity should be considered further.

Keywords: Acceptability; Apease; Behaviour change; Feasibility; Intervention; Office worker; Sedentary.

MeSH terms

Adult
Costs and Cost Analysis
Female
Humans
Middle Aged
Occupational Health*
Sedentary Behavior
Workload
Workplace*