Background. The emergence of the pedometer as a useful motivational aid for increasing physical activity (PA) has supported its use in PA interventions. Objectives. To examine the feasibility of a 10-week pedometer-based intervention complemented by regular motivational messages, to increase ambulatory PA; and to determine the minimum sample size required for a randomised, controlled trial (RCT). Methods. Participants, sourced by convenience sampling of employees from an academic institution, were randomly assigned to either an intervention group (IG) (n=11) or control group (CG) (n=11), following baseline health measurements and blinded pedometer wear (week 1). Participants in the IG subsequently wore an unblinded pedometer (10 weeks) to self-monitor daily steps. Individualised messages using pedometer data (IG) and general motivational messages (IG and CG) were provided biweekly. Blinded pedometer wear (IG and CG) and a feedback questionnaire (IG) were completed at week 12. Pedometer data were compared between the IG and CG at week 12. Results. Participants' perceptions of the intervention supported the benefit of the pedometer as a useful motivational aid and a reminder to increase steps per day. Occupational sitting time and inability to incorporate PA into daily routine emerged as the main barrier to adherence. Steps per day increased more in the IG (mean ± standard deviation (SD) 996±1 748) than in the CG (mean±SD 97±750). Modest improvements were noted in all clinical measures (IG). Conclusion. Based on the improvement of 1 000 steps/day (IG), a minimum of 85 participants in the IG and CG, respectively, is required for a future RCT (80% power; p<0.05). We recommend a minimum of 150 participants in each group to account for loss to follow-up and to allow for subgroup analyses.

No abstract

Background.The association between self-perceived and actual physical activity, with particular reference to physical activity guidelines, may be an important factor in determining the extent of uptake of and compliance with physical activity. Objectives. To examine the association between self-perceived and actual physical activity in relation to physical activity guidelines, with reference to volume, intensity and duration of steps/day, and to establish the level of agreement between pedometer-measured and selfreported ambulatory physical activity, in relation to current guidelines. Methods. A convenience sample of adults (N=312; mean (standard deviation) age 37 (9) years), wore a pedometer (minimum 3 consecutive days) and completed a questionnaire that included information on physical activity patterns. Analyses of covariance, adjusted for age and gender, compared volume-and intensity-based steps according to meeting/not meeting guidelines (self-reported). The extent of agreement between self-reported and pedometer-measured physical activity was also determined. Results. Average (SD) steps/day were 6 574 (3 541). Of a total of 312 participants' self-reported data, those meeting guidelines (n=63) accumulated significantly more steps/day than those not meeting guidelines (8 753 (4 251) v. 6 022 (3 114) total steps/day and 1 772 (2 020) v. 421 (1 140) aerobic steps/day, respectively; p<0.0001). More than half of the group who self-reported meeting the guidelines did not meet guidelines as per pedometer data. Conclusion. The use of pedometers as an alternative and/or adjunct to self-reported measures is an area for consideration. Steps/day recommendations that consider intensity-based steps may provide significant effects in improving fitness and health.S Afr J SM 2014;26(3):77-81.

Purpose In March 2020, the WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic. Previous virus outbreaks, such as the SARS outbreak in 2003, appeared to have a great impact on the mental health of healthcare workers. The aim of this paper is to study to what extent mental health of healthcare workers differed from non-healthcare workers during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We used data from a large-scale longitudinal online survey conducted by the Corona Behavioral Unit in the Netherlands. Eleven measurement rounds were analyzed, from April 2020 to March 2021 (N = 16,657; number of observations=64,316). Mental health, as measured by the 5-item Mental Health Inventory, was compared between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers over time, by performing linear GEE-analyses. Results Mental health scores were higher among healthcare workers compared to non-healthcare workers during the first year of the pandemic (1.29 on a 0-100 scale; 95%-CI=0.75-1.84). During peak periods of the pandemic, with over 100 hospital admissions or over 25 ICU admissions per day and subsequently more restrictive measures, mental health scores were observed to be lower in both healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers. Conclusions During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed no relevant difference in mental health between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers in the Netherlands. To be better prepared for another pandemic, future research should investigate which factors hinder and which factors support healthcare workers to maintain a good mental health. Key messages • During the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed no relevant difference in mental health between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers in the Netherlands. • During peak periods of the pandemic, mental health was observed to be poorer in both healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers.

Objectives Evaluating the process of a vitality intervention, consisting of a vigorous physical activity component and a yoga programme, among older workers. Methods This process evaluation was part of a RCT among 730 workers aged ≥45 years from two academic hospitals. 367 workers were randomised into the intervention group and received a 6-months intervention consisting of a Vitality Exercise Programme (VEP) combined with three visits to a Personal Vitality Coach (PVC), aimed at goal setting, feedback, and problem solving. The VEP consisted of a guided yoga and workout session, and aerobic exercising without direct faceto-face instruction, all once a week. To gain insight into the context, dose delivered, fi delity, reach, dose received, and participants' attitude, data was collected by means of questionnaire, VEP attendance registration forms, and coaching registration forms. Results The reach of the yoga sessions, workout sessions and PVC visits was 70.6%, 63.8%, and 89.6%, respectively. There were substantial differences between the two locations. The dose received for yoga was 10.4 and for the workout 11.1 sessions. Attendance rates for yoga and workout sessions were 51.7% and 44.8%. This rate differed between the locations for yoga (63.2% vs 46.5%). Workers attended on average 2.7 PVC visits. Overall, workers were satisfi ed with the intervention components and rated the sessions as following: 7.5 for yoga, 7.8 for workout sessions, and 6.9 for PVC visits. Conclusions Workers were willing to attend the guided group sessions and the PVC visits, although there were differences between the locations. Overall, workers were positive about the intervention.