↓ Skip to main content

Installation of a stationary high desk in the workplace: effect of a 6-week intervention on physical activity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
24 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
147 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Installation of a stationary high desk in the workplace: effect of a 6-week intervention on physical activity
Published in
BMC Public Health, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1724-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Motohiko Miyachi, Satoshi Kurita, Julien Tripette, Ryo Takahara, Yoshiko Yagi, Haruka Murakami

Abstract

Extended sitting time at work is viewed as a crucial public health issue. Encouraging workers to stand during their office hours via the installation of standing desks maybe one effective option to combat this. Here, we investigate whether the installation of high desks in the workplace can induce positive changes in the amount of physical activity (PA) and thereby lead to subsequent improvements in anthropometric parameters. Thirty-two white-collar workers (22 men and 10 women, mean age 44.2) were randomly divided into two groups. A randomised crossover trial was performed for 13 weeks. During the experimental period, subjects completed their office work in a standing position using stationary high desks (standing work, SW) for 10 hours per week or more (SW period). The subjects were asked to maintain their normal sitting working habits during the control period (CONT period). The primary outcome was PA, which was assessed objectively using a triaxial accelerometer during weekdays and weekends. The secondary outcomes were anthropometric measurements. For each group and each parameter, the mean values during each period were recorded and were compared by paired t test. The daily total PA (10.2  ±  2.4 vs. 9.7  ±  2.3 METs · h/day, P = 0.043), MVPA (4.2  ±  2.2 vs. 3.7  ±  1.8 METs · h/day, P = 0.025), time spent in moderate PA (58.2 ± 20.7 vs. 53.4 ± 17.0 min/day, P = 0.019) and time spent in MVPA (62.8 ± 25.1 vs. 57.0 ± 20.3 min/day, P = 0.019) were significantly higher during the SW period compared to the CONT period. A weekdays verses weekends subanalysis revealed that these parameters were significantly higher during the SW period compared to the CONT period during weekdays only. No significant differences were noted before and after SW periods for most of the anthropometric measures, except waist circumference (83.7  ±  7.9 vs. 83.0  ±  7.9 cm, respectively, P = 0.007). Standing work, via the installation of high desks, significantly increases moderate to vigorous physical activity, especially on weekdays. UMIN-CRT, UMIN000016731 , 7th March 2015.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
Indonesia 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 142 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 11%
Researcher 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 22 15%
Unknown 41 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 25 17%
Sports and Recreations 18 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 18 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Psychology 7 5%
Other 24 16%
Unknown 46 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2015.
All research outputs
#1,757,139
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#1,934
of 14,855 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,434
of 264,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#31
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,855 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 264,665 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.