Understanding and Influencing Occupational Sedentary Behavior: A Mixed-Methods Approach in a Multiethnic Asian Population

Abstract

We aim to assess sedentary behavior (SB) and its determinants, as well as potential strategies to reduce SB among employees in a tertiary hospital in Singapore, using a mixed-methods approach grounded in the socioecological framework. All employees with email and security guards of a tertiary hospital in Singapore were invited to complete a questionnaire that captured sociodemographics and self-reported domain-specific SB. Environmental influences of occupational SB were assessed using an adapted version of the Checklist for Health Promotion Environments at the Worksite (CHEW). Focus group discussion (FGD) addressed perceptions, barriers, and strategies toward reducing workplace SB. Analyses were performed separately and integrated using an inductive comparative approach. The median occupational sitting time ( n = 938) was 300 minutes/day, and highest among administrative staff (administrative, 421 minutes/day; allied health, 300 minutes/day; ancillary, 300 minutes/day; nursing, 120 minutes/day; medical/dental/others, 240 minutes/day; p value: <.001). The CHEW assessment identified poor physical and information environment contributing to occupational SB. FGDs confirmed an unsupportive environment and elicited barriers such as low SB awareness, nature of work, and workplace norms. Besides environmental approaches, participants suggested having face-to-face communication and social modelling to promote more breaks from sitting. This mixed-methods study among diverse professional groups of a tertiary hospital indicated a large amount of occupational SB, particularly among administrative staff. Raising awareness of the health risks of SB and building a supportive organizational culture, information, and physical environment emerged as significant factors. To reduce occupational SB, multicomponent interventions addressing these diverse factors are warranted.

COVID-19 pandémia hatása a munkavállalók fizikai aktivitására

“…Az élmúlt évékbén jéléntősén mégváltózótt az émbérék élétvitélé, mélynék kövétkéztébén az ülő élétmódót fólytató émbérék száma élsősórban a féjlétt órszágókban mégémélkédétt (Rosenkranz et al, 2020). Az ülő élétmódhóz jéléntős mértékbén járul hózzá a munkahélyén üléssél töltött idő, mély némzétközi kutatásók szérint a munkanap hárómnégyédét tészi ki (Ryen et al, 2011; Ryde et al, 2014; Thorp et al, 2012;Wang et al, 2020,). Aggasztó azoknak a kutatásoknak az érédményé, mélyek szerint minél több időt tölt a munkahélyén inaktívan a munkavállaló, annál nagyóbb a valószínűségé, hógy szabadidéjébén is több időt fóg üléssél tölteni (Clemens et al, 2014;Kazi et al, 2014).…”

Changes in Workers’ Physical Activity and Sedentary Behavior during the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Due to the significant increase in SB levels in most developed countries over the past century, occupational SB has appeared as a substantial public health issue. The main contributor to the daily sedentary time for workers is the substantial sitting time at the workplace [2]. People may spend three-quarters of the workday in SB [3], and according to Kazi et al, if people spend more time sitting during the workday, they will spend more time sitting during their leisure time [4].…”

A cross-sectional study on the perceived barriers to physical activity and their associations with domain-specific physical activity and sedentary behaviour

“…Several studies have examined the association between work commitment and sedentary behaviour. Wang et al examined the sedentary behaviour of employees in a tertiary hospital in Singapore and revealed that the median sitting time was five hours/day [ 53 ]. Furthermore, the environment lacked the infrastructure to reduce sedentary behaviour at work [ 53 ].…”

“…Wang et al examined the sedentary behaviour of employees in a tertiary hospital in Singapore and revealed that the median sitting time was five hours/day [ 53 ]. Furthermore, the environment lacked the infrastructure to reduce sedentary behaviour at work [ 53 ]. Employees also misunderstood that decreasing physical inactivity was equivalent to reducing sedentary behaviour [ 53 ].…”