"Are We Working (Too) Comfortably?": Understanding the Nature of and Factors Associated with Sedentary Behaviour When Working in the Home Environment.

Home working has increased due to COVID-19, but little is known about how this change has impacted the health risk behaviour of elevated sedentary time. The aim of this cross-sectional exploratory study was to assess occupational sitting behaviour when working at home, and use the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to identify influences on this behaviour. University staff (n = 267; 69% female; 92% white) who were predominantly working from home completed a questionnaire to assess sitting time, sitting breaks, demographic and occupational characteristics, and a 7-item COM-B questionnaire and open-ended questions to assess influences on time spent sitting whilst working from home. Data were analysed descriptively, a repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine differences in the COM-B items, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of sitting time. Staff spent on average 89.5% (SD = 17.1) of their time sitting whilst working at home, and took an average of 1.36 (1.38) sitting breaks per hour. There were significant and meaningful differences in the influence of the COM factors on ability and willingness to reduce sitting behaviour (p < .0001; ηp 2 = .38), and the open-ended responses added further context. The included variables accounted for 20.7% of variance in sitting behaviour, with age, sitting breaks, motivation-automatic, and opportunity-physical contributing significantly. Working from home leads to elevated levels of sitting, and the COM-B provides a useful model to identify key influences on ability and willingness to reduce sitting. Strategies incorporating regular breaks, habit formation/reversal, and restructuring the physical environment may be beneficial.

“Are We Working (Too) Comfortably?”: Understanding the Nature of and Factors Associated with Sedentary Behaviour When Working in the Home Environment

Home working has increased due to COVID-19, but little is known about how this change has impacted the health risk behaviour of elevated sedentary time. The aim of this cross-sectional exploratory study was to assess occupational sitting behaviour when working at home, and use the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to identify influences on this behaviour. University staff (n = 267;69% female;92% white) who were predominantly working from home completed a questionnaire to assess sitting time, sitting breaks, demographic and occupational characteristics, and a 7-item COM-B questionnaire and open-ended questions to assess influences on time spent sitting whilst working from home. Data were analysed descriptively, a repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine differences in the COM-B items, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of sitting time. Staff spent on average 89.5% (SD = 17.1) of their time sitting whilst working at home, and took an average of 1.36 (1.38) sitting breaks per hour. There were significant and meaningful differences in the influence of the COM factors on ability and willingness to reduce sitting behaviour (p < .0001;ηp2 = .38), and the open-ended responses added further context. The included variables accounted for 20.7% of variance in sitting behaviour, with age, sitting breaks, motivation-automatic, and opportunity-physical contributing significantly. Working from home leads to elevated levels of sitting, and the COM-B provides a useful model to identify key influences on ability and willingness to reduce sitting. Strategies incorporating regular breaks, habit formation/reversal, and restructuring the physical environment may be beneficial.

What works to reduce sedentary behavior in the office, and could these intervention components transfer to the home working environment?: A rapid review and transferability appraisal.

Background: Working patterns have changed dramatically due to COVID-19, with many workers now spending at least a portion of their working week at home. The office environment was already associated with high levels of sedentary behavior, and there is emerging evidence that working at home further elevates these levels. The aim of this rapid review (PROSPERO CRD42021278539) was to build on existing evidence to identify what works to reduce sedentary behavior in an office environment, and consider whether these could be transferable to support those working at home. Methods: The results of a systematic search of databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINHAL, and SportDiscus from 10 August 2017 to 6 September 2021 were added to the references included in a 2018 Cochrane review of office based sedentary interventions. These references were screened and controlled peer-reviewed English language studies demonstrating a beneficial direction of effect for office-based interventions on sedentary behavior outcomes in healthy adults were included. For each study, two of five authors screened the title and abstract, the full-texts, undertook data extraction, and assessed risk of bias on the included studies. Informed by the Behavior Change Wheel, the most commonly used intervention functions and behavior change techniques were identified from the extracted data. Finally, a sample of common intervention strategies were evaluated by the researchers and stakeholders for potential transferability to the working at home environment. Results: Twenty-two studies including 29 interventions showing a beneficial direction of effect on sedentary outcomes were included. The most commonly used intervention functions were training (n = 21), environmental restructuring (n = 21), education (n = 15), and enablement (n = 15). Within these the commonly used behavior change techniques were instructions on how to perform the behavior (n = 21), adding objects to the environment (n = 20), and restructuring the physical environment (n = 19). Those strategies with the most promise for transferring to the home environment included education materials, use of role models, incentives, and prompts. Conclusions: This review has characterized interventions that show a beneficial direction of effect to reduce office sedentary behavior, and identified promising strategies to support workers in the home environment as the world adapts to a new working landscape.Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021278539, identifier CRD42021278539.

Scoping Review of Yoga in Schools: Mental Health and Cognitive Outcomes in Both Neurotypical and Neurodiverse Youth Populations.

Yoga is used widely as a therapeutic tool for physical and mental well-being. The mind-body activity could be an inclusive and cost-effective intervention used within schools to help tackle the mental health crisis in youth populations. To date, research has focused on mainly neurotypical youth populations. However, greater acknowledgement of the impact for neurodiverse youth populations is warranted. Therefore, the aim of this scoping review is to understand what is known about the relationships between yoga in schools and mental health and cognition in neurotypical and neurodiverse youth populations. METHODS: This review followed O'Malley and Arskey's methodological framework. A comprehensive database search using fundamental keywords and index terms was conducted. Screening was carried out in CovidenceTM software. RESULTS: Substantial evidence to support the use of school-based yoga programmes for the improvement of anxiety, self-concept, resilience, depression, self-esteem, subjective and psychological well-being, executive function, inhibition, working memory, attention and academic performance in neurotypical populations was found. Evidence to support school-based yoga programmes in neurodiverse populations with improvements in self-concept, subjective well-being, executive function, academic performance and attention was also found. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the provision of yoga in schools to improve mental health and cognition whilst also creating clear pathways for future research and school-based yoga intervention development.

A study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial of an intervention to increase activity and reduce sedentary behaviour in people with severe mental illness: Walking fOR Health (WORtH) Study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe mental illness (SMI) are less physically active and more sedentary than healthy controls, contributing to poorer physical health outcomes in this population. There is a need to understand the feasibility and acceptability, and explore the effective components, of health behaviour change interventions targeting physical activity and sedentary behaviour in this population in rural and semi-rural settings. METHODS: This 13-week randomised controlled feasibility trial compares the Walking fOR Health (WORtH) multi-component behaviour change intervention, which includes education, goal-setting and self-monitoring, with a one-off education session. It aims to recruit 60 inactive adults with SMI via three community mental health teams in Ireland and Northern Ireland. Primary outcomes are related to feasibility and acceptability, including recruitment, retention and adherence rates, adverse events and qualitative feedback from participants and clinicians. Secondary outcome measures include self-reported and accelerometer-measured physical activity and sedentary behaviour, anthropometry measures, physical function and mental wellbeing. A mixed-methods process evaluation will be undertaken. This study protocol outlines changes to the study in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. DISCUSSION: This study will address the challenges and implications of remote delivery of the WORtH intervention due to the COVID-19 pandemic and inform the design of a future definitive randomised controlled trial if it is shown to be feasible. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT04134871 ) on 22 October 2019.

Get the message? A scoping review of physical activity messaging.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how to create and deliver effective physical activity (PA) messages for and to various population subgroups may play a role in increasing population PA levels. This scoping review aimed to provide an overview of what is known about PA messaging and highlight key research gaps. METHODS: We followed a 5-stage protocol proposed by Arksey & O'Malley and the Preferred Reporting Items For Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for scoping reviews checklist. Stage 1: research questions were identified. Stage 2: we identified relevant studies by searching electronic databases, contacting existing networks and hand searching reference lists. Stage 3: studies were screened in Covidence™ software. Stage 4: study data were extracted and charted. Stage 5: findings from included studies were collated, summarised and reported in two ways: (1) a descriptive numerical analysis providing insight into extent, nature and distribution of the included studies, and (2) a narrative summary summarizing the evidence reviewed organised by messaging concepts and by population subgroup. RESULTS: A total of 9525 references were imported into Covidence™ for screening. Of these, 123 studies were included in final analysis. We found that PA messaging evidence is complex and multidimensional in nature, with numerous concepts to consider when creating or evaluating messages. The extent to which these different PA messaging concepts have been researched is variable. Where research has accumulated and evidence is consistent, it supports the following: (1) PA messages should be framed positively and highlight short-term outcomes specifically relating to social and mental health, (2) message content should be tailored or targeted to intended recipient(s), and (3) when developing messages, formative research, psychological theory and/or social marketing principles should be used. CONCLUSION: While it is unlikely to address global inactivity on its own, PA messaging may play a valuable role improving population PA levels. However, it is a complex and multidimensional concept and greater understanding is still needed. We present a synthesis of the existing evidence, highlighting key areas where evidence has accumulated and where gaps lie, as well as recommendations for PA messaging to different population subgroups.