BACKGROUND: Interventions to increase physical activity or reduce sedentary behaviour within the workplace setting have shown mixed effects. This cluster randomised controlled trial assessed whether multi-component interventions, focusing on changes at the individual, environmental, and organisational levels, either increased physical activity or reduced sedentary behaviour, compared to a passive control group. METHODS: Teams of office-workers from two companies participated in one of two interventions (iPA: targeting physical activity; or iSED: targeting sedentary behaviour), or wait-list control group (C). Exclusion criterion was very high physical activity level (MVPA >= 30 min/day in >= 10 min bouts every day). Randomisation occurred at the level of workplace cluster, and groups were randomly allocated (1:1) with stratification for company and cluster size. Personnel involved in data collection and processing were blinded to group allocation. Both interventions included five sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy counselling for 6 months. iPA included counselling focused on physical activity, access to a gym, and encouragement to exercise, and go for lunch walks. iSED included counselling on sedentary behaviour and encouragement to reduce sitting and increase engagement in standing- and walking-meetings. At baseline and the 6-month mark accelerometers were worn on the hip and thigh for 7 days. The primary outcomes were group differences in time spent in moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity (%MVPA) and in sedentary behaviour (%), analysed using Bayesian multilevel modelling for those with complete data. RESULTS: Two-hundred and sixty three office workers (73% women, mean age 42 +/- 9 years, education 15 +/- 2 years) were randomised into 23 cluster teams (iPA n = 84, 8 clusters; iSED n = 87, 7 clusters; C n = 92, 7 clusters). No significant group differences (posterior mean ratios, 95% credible interval) were found after the intervention for %MVPA or for %sedentary. %MVPA: iPA versus C (0.04, -0.80 to 0.82); iSED versus C (0.47, -0.41 to 1.32); iPA versus iSED (0.43, -0.42 to 1.27). %sedentary: iPA versus C (1.16, -1.66 to 4.02); iSED versus C (-0.44, -3.50 to 2.64); iPA versus iSED (-1.60, -4.72 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: The multi-component interventions focusing on either physical activity or sedentary behaviour were unsuccessful at increasing device-measured physical activity or reducing sedentary behaviour compared to a control group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN92968402. Registered 27/2/2018, recruitment started 15/03/2018.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help

• PubMed Central
• DOI
• PubMed
• PDF locator
• publisher