Impacts of a Standing Desk Intervention within an English Primary School Classroom: A Pilot Controlled Trial
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Setting
2.2. Participant Recruitment and Ethical Approval
2.3. Intervention
2.4. Control Group
2.5. Measures
2.5.1. Quantitative Measures
Sitting and Physical Activity Behavior
Anthropometrics
Behavior-Related Mental Health
Musculoskeletal Discomfort
Cognitive Function
2.5.2. Qualitative Measures
Interviews
Classroom Observations
2.6. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Characteristics
3.2. Quantitative Data
3.2.1. Sitting and Physical Activity
3.2.2. Behavior-Related Mental Health, Musculoskeletal Discomfort, and Cognitive Function
3.3. Qualitative Data
3.3.1. Interviews and Focus Groups
“Do you think the standing desks are needed within your classroom and why?”
“How well do you think you are able to teach/learn with the new standing desks?”
“How have the desks affected the class atmosphere?”
3.3.2. Classroom Observations
Observation One: Day 1 of Intervention
Observation Two: Week 16 (4 Months) of Intervention
“The children walk in from the morning assembly and the teacher immediately tells all children to raise their standing desks and begin working on the maths activities on the white board. There are a number of moans and groans from the children. It is clear this is a common practice. For the duration of ‘standing time’ a lot of children are leaning on the desks and are not actually standing up. A lot of the children kept sitting down on their stools. I counted the teacher telling individuals (not the same children) 10 times to stand back up during the 20-min period. Once the 20 min is complete and the teacher declares everyone can either sit or stand, 22 out of 27 children immediately chose to sit back down. After another five minutes two more children sit down, leading to three children standing. After a further five minutes two more children sit back down, leading to one child choosing to stand up to work. No other children chose to stand up during the remainder of the 30-min observation.”
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Tremblay, M.S.; Aubert, S.; Barnes, J.D.; Saunders, T.J.; Carson, V.; Latimer-Cheung, A.E.; Chastin, S.; Altenburg, T.M.; Chinapaw, M.J.M. Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN)—Terminology Consensus Project process and outcome. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2017, 14, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sherry, A.P.; Pearson, N.; Ridgers, N.D.; Barber, S.E.; Bingham, D.D.; Nagy, L.C.; Clemes, S.A. activPAL-measured sitting levels and patterns in 9–10 years old children from a UK city. J. Public Health 2019, 41, 757–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Carson, V.; Hunter, S.; Kuzik, N.; Gray, C.E.; Poitras, V.J.; Chaput, J.-P.; Saunders, T.J.; Katzmarzyk, P.T.; Okely, A.D.; Gorber, S.C.; et al. Systematic review of sedentary behaviour and health indicators in school-aged children and youth: An update. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2016, 41, S240–S265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cliff, D.P.; Hesketh, K.; Vella, S.A.; Hinkley, T.; Tsiros, M.D.; Ridgers, N.D.; Carver, A.; Veitch, J.; Parrish, A.; Hardy, L.L.; et al. Objectively measured sedentary behaviour and health and development in children and adolescents: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2016, 17, 330–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Ekelund, U.; Steene-Johannessen, J.; Brown, W.J.; Fagerland, M.W.; Owen, N.; Powell, K.E.; Bauman, A.; Lee, I.-M. Does physical activity attenuate, or even eliminate, the detrimental association of sitting time with mortality? A harmonised meta-analysis of data from more than 1 million men and women. Lancet 2016, 388, 1302–1310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Biddle, S.J.H.; Pearson, N.; Ross, G.M.; Braithwaite, R. Tracking of sedentary behaviours of young people: A systematic review. Prev. Med. 2010, 51, 345–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pearson, N.; Haycraft, E.; Johnston, J.P.; Atkin, A.J. Sedentary behaviour across the primary-secondary school transition: A systematic review. Prev. Med. 2017, 94, 40–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Janssen, X.; Mann, K.D.; Basterfield, L.; Parkinson, K.N.; Pearce, M.S.; Reilly, J.; Adamson, A.J.; Reilly, J.J. Development of sedentary behavior across childhood and adolescence: Longitudinal analysis of the Gateshead Millennium Study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2016, 13, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clark, H.; Coll-Seck, A.M.; Banerjee, A.; Peterson, S.; Dalglish, S.L.; Ameratunga, S.; Balabanova, D.; Bhan, M.K.; Bhutta, Z.A.; Borrazzo, J.; et al. A future for the world’s children? A WHO–UNICEF–Lancet Commission. Lancet 2020, 395, 605–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Morton, K.; Atkin, A.J.; Corder, K.; Suhrcke, M.; Van Sluijs, E.M.F. The school environment and adolescent physical activity and sedentary behaviour: A mixed-studies systematic review. Obes. Rev. 2015, 17, 142–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Mooses, K.; Mägi, K.; Riso, E.M.; Kalma, M.; Kaasik, P.; Kull, M. Objectively measured sedentary behaviour and moderate and vigorous physical activity in different school subjects: A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 2017, 17, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hinckson, E.A.; Salmon, J.; Benden, M.; Clemes, S.; Sudholz, B.; Barber, S.E.; Aminian, S.; Ridgers, N.D. Standing Classrooms: Research and Lessons Learned from Around the World. Sports Med. 2015, 46, 977–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sherry, A.P.; Pearson, N.; Clemes, S. The effects of standing desks within the school classroom: A systematic review. Prev. Med. Rep. 2016, 3, 338–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Altenburg, T.M.; Chinapaw, M.J. Bouts and breaks in children’s sedentary time: Currently used operational definitions and recommendations for future research. Prev. Med. 2015, 77, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hegarty, L.M.; Mair, J.L.; Kirby, K.; Murtagh, E.; Murphy, M.H. School-based Interventions to Reduce Sedentary Behaviour in Children: A Systematic Review. AIMS Public Health 2016, 3, 520–541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ucci, M.; Law, S.; Andrews, R.; Fisher, A.; Smith, L.; Sawyer, A.; Marmot, A. Indoor school environments, physical activity, sitting behaviour and pedagogy: A scoping review. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayala, A.M.C.; Sudholz, B.; Salmon, J.; Dunstan, D.; Ridgers, N.D.; Arundell, L.; Timperio, A. The impact of height-adjustable desks and prompts to break-up classroom sitting on adolescents’ energy expenditure, adiposity markers and perceived musculoskeletal discomfort. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0203938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clemes, S.; Bingham, D.; Ridgers, N.D.; Fletcher, E.A.; Pearson, N.; Salmon, J.; Dunstan, D.; Barber, S.E. Reducing children’s classroom sitting time using sit-to-stand desks: Findings from pilot studies in UK and Australian primary schools. J. Public Health (Oxf.) 2016, 38, 526–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aminian, S.; Hinckson, E.A.; Stewart, T. Modifying the classroom environment to increase standing and reduce sitting. Build. Res. Inf. 2015, 43, 631–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hinckson, E.A.; Aminian, S.; Ikeda, E.; Stewart, T.; Smith, M.; Duncan, S.; Schofield, G. Acceptability of standing workstations in elementary schools: A pilot study. Prev. Med. 2013, 56, 82–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koepp, G.A.; Snedden, B.J.; Flynn, L.; Puccinelli, D.; Huntsman, B.; Levine, J.A. Feasibility Analysis of Standing Desks for Sixth Graders. ICAN Infant Child Adolesc. Nutr. 2012, 4, 89–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayala, A.M.C.; Salmon, J.; Timperio, A.; Sudholz, B.; Ridgers, N.D.; Sethi, P.; Dunstan, D. Impact of an 8-Month Trial Using Height-Adjustable Desks on Children’s Classroom Sitting Patterns and Markers of Cardio-Metabolic and Musculoskeletal Health. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, 13, 1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Clemes, S.; Bingham, D.D.; Pearson, N.; Chen, Y.-L.; Edwardson, C.L.; McEachan, R.R.C.; Tolfrey, K.; Cale, L.; Richardson, G.; Fray, M.; et al. Stand Out in Class: Restructuring the classroom environment to reduce sitting time—Findings from a pilot cluster randomised controlled trial. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2020, 17, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wendel, M.L.; Benden, M.; Zhao, H.; Jeffrey, C. Stand-Biased Versus Seated Classrooms and Childhood Obesity: A Randomized Experiment in Texas. Am. J. Public Health 2016, 106, 1849–1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ee, J.; Parry, S.; Oliveira, B.I.R.D.; McVeigh, J.; Howie, E.K.; Straker, L. Does a Classroom Standing Desk Intervention Modify Standing and Sitting Behaviour and Musculoskeletal Symptoms during School Time and Physical Activity during Waking Time? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Parry, S.; Oliveira, B.I.R.D.; McVeigh, J.; Ee, J.; Jacques, A.; Straker, L. Standing Desks in a Grade 4 Classroom over the Full School Year. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Benden, M.; Blake, J.J.; Wendel, M.L.; Huber, J.C. The Impact of Stand-Biased Desks in Classrooms on Calorie Expenditure in Children. Am. J. Public Health 2011, 101, 1433–1436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benden, M.E.; Wendel, M.L.; Jeffrey, C.E.; Morales, M.L. Within-subjects analysis of the effects of a stand-biased classroom intervention on energy expenditure. J. Exerc. Physiol. 2012, 15, 9–19. [Google Scholar]
- Benden, M.; Zhao, H.; Jeffrey, C.E.; Wendel, M.L.; Blake, J.J. The Evaluation of the Impact of a Stand-Biased Desk on Energy Expenditure and Physical Activity for Elementary School Students. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2014, 11, 9361–9375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Straker, L.; Howie, E.K.; Cliff, D.P.; Davern, M.; Engelen, L.; Gomersall, S.R.; Ziviani, J.; Schranz, N.; Olds, T.; Tomkinson, G.R. Australia and Other Nations Are Failing to Meet Sedentary Behaviour Guidelines for Children: Implications and a Way Forward. J. Phys. Act. Health 2016, 13, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dornhecker, M.; Blake, J.J.; Benden, M.; Zhao, H.; Wendel, M. The effect of stand-biased desks on academic engagement: An exploratory study. Int. J. Health Promot. Educ. 2015, 53, 271–280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Batty, G.D.; Leon, D.A. Socio-economic position and coronary heart disease risk factors in children and young people. Evidence from UK epidemiological studies. Eur. J. Public Health 2002, 12, 263–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wickham, S.; Anwar, E.; Barr, B.; Law, C.; Taylor-Robinson, D. Poverty and child health in the UK: Using evidence for action. Arch. Dis. Child. 2016, 101, 759–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Raphael, D. Poverty in childhood and adverse health outcomes in adulthood. Maturitas 2011, 69, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Craig, R.; Hirani, V.; Mindell, J. (Eds.) Health Survey for England 2011: Health, Social Care and Lifestyles; NHS Information Centre: Leeds, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Salmon, J. Novel Strategies to Promote Children’s Physical Activities and Reduce Sedentary Behavior. J. Phys. Act. Health 2010, 7, S299–S306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Owen, C.G.; Nightingale, C.M.; Rudnicka, A.R.; Cook, D.G.; Ekelund, U.; Whincup, P.H. Ethnic and gender differences in physical activity levels among 9–10-year-old children of white European, South Asian and African–Caribbean origin: The Child Heart Health Study in England (CHASE Study). Int. J. Epidemiol. 2009, 38, 1082–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hornby-Turner, Y.; Hampshire, K.; Pollard, T.M. A comparison of physical activity and sedentary behaviour in 9–11 year old British Pakistani and White British girls: A mixed methods study. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2014, 11, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Monger, J. Standard Occupational Classification 2010—Implementation in the Office for National Statistics. Econ. Labour Mark. Rev. 2011, 5, 62–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosenbaum, M.; Fennoy, I.; Accacha, S.; Altshuler, L.A.; Carey, D.E.; Holleran, S.; Rapaport, R.; Shelov, S.P.; Speiser, P.W.; Ten, S.; et al. Racial/ethnic differences in clinical and biochemical type 2 diabetes mellitus risk factors in children. Obesity 2013, 21, 2081–2090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whincup, P.H.; Nightingale, C.M.; Owen, C.G.; Rudnicka, A.R.; Gibb, I.; McKay, C.M.; Donin, A.; Sattar, N.; Alberti, K.G.M.M.; Cook, D.G. Early Emergence of Ethnic Differences in Type 2 Diabetes Precursors in the UK: The Child Heart and Health Study in England (CHASE Study). PLoS Med. 2010, 7, e1000263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minges, K.E.; Chao, A.M.; Irwin, M.L.; Owen, N.; Park, C.; Whittemore, R.; Salmon, J. Classroom Standing Desks and Sedentary Behavior: A Systematic Review. Pediatrics 2016, 137, e20153087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Poitras, V.J.; Gray, C.E.; Borghese, M.M.; Carson, V.; Chaput, J.-P.; Janssen, I.; Katzmarzyk, P.T.; Pate, R.R.; Gorber, S.C.; Kho, M.E.; et al. Systematic review of the relationships between objectively measured physical activity and health indicators in school-aged children and youth. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2016, 41, S197–S239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. English Indices of Deprivation. Available online: http://imd-by-postcode.opendatacommunities.org/ (accessed on 11 May 2020).
- Wright, J.; Small, N.; Raynor, P.; Tuffnell, D.; Bhopal, R.; Cameron, N.; Fairley, L.; Lawlor, D.A.; Parslow, R.C.; Petherick, E.; et al. Cohort Profile: The Born in Bradford multi-ethnic family cohort study. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2012, 42, 978–991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ginsburg, H.P.; Opper, S. Piaget’s Theory of Intellectual Development; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Erwin, H.; Beighle, A.; Routen, A.C.; Montemayor, B. Perceptions of Using Sit-to-Stand Desks in a Middle School Classroom. Health Promot. Pr. 2017, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Michie, S.; Atkins, L.; West, R. The Behaviour Change Wheel. A Guide to Designing Interventions, 1st ed.; Silverback Publishing: Sutton, UK, 2014; pp. 1003–1010. [Google Scholar]
- Ridgers, N.D.; Timperio, A.; Cerin, E.; Salmon, J. Within- and between-day associations between children’s sitting and physical activity time. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Janssen, X.; Basterfield, L.; Parkinson, K.; Pearce, M.S.; Reilly, J.K.; Adamson, A.J.; Reilly, J.J. Gateshead Millennium Study Core Team Objective measurement of sedentary behavior: Impact of non-wear time rules on changes in sedentary time. BMC Public Health 2015, 15, 504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Freeman, J.V.; Cole, T.J.; Chinn, S.; Jones, P.R.; White, E.M.; Preece, M.A. Cross sectional stature and weight reference curves for the UK. Arch. Dis. Child 1995, 73, 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Goodman, R. The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A Research Note. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 1997, 38, 581–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benden, M.; Pickens, A.; Shipp, E.; Perry, J.; Schneider, D. Evaluating a school based childhood obesity intervention for posture and comfort. Health 2013, 5, 54–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- MacLeod, C.M. Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychol. Bull. 1991, 109, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corsi, P.M. Human Memory and the Medial Temporal Region of the Brain. Ph.D. Thesis, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada, 1973. [Google Scholar]
- Van Der Niet, A.G.; Smith, J.; Oosterlaan, J.; Scherder, E.J.; Hartman, E.; Visscher, C. Effects of a Cognitively Demanding Aerobic Intervention During Recess on Children’s Physical Fitness and Executive Functioning. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 2016, 28, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Alesi, M.; Bianco, A.; Luppina, G.; Palma, A.; Pepi, A. Improving children’s coordinative skills and executive functions: The effects of a football exercise program. Percept. Mot. Skills 2016, 122, 27–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Durlak, J.A.; Dupre, E.P. Implementation Matters: A Review of Research on the Influence of Implementation on Program Outcomes and the Factors Affecting Implementation. Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 2008, 41, 327–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hammersley, M.; Atkinson, P. Recording and Organizing Data. In Ethnography: Principles in Practice; Routledge: London, UK, 1995; pp. 175–204. [Google Scholar]
- Coombs, N.; Shelton, N.; Rowlands, A.; Stamatakis, E. Children’s and adolescents’ sedentary behaviour in relation to socioeconomic position. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 2013, 67, 868–874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Verloigne, M.; Ridgers, N.D.; De Bourdeaudhuij, I.; Cardon, G. Effect and process evaluation of implementing standing desks in primary and secondary schools in Belgium: A cluster-randomised controlled trial. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2018, 15, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blake, J.J.; Benden, M.; Wendel, M.L. Using Stand/Sit Workstations in Classrooms. J. Public Health Manag. Pr. 2012, 18, 412–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gallagher, K.M.; Campbell, T.; Callaghan, J. The influence of a seated break on prolonged standing induced low back pain development. Ergonomics 2014, 57, 555–562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sudholz, B.; Timperio, A.; Ridgers, N.D.; Dunstan, D.W.; Baldock, R.; Holland, B.; Salmon, J. The Impact and Feasibility of Introducing Height-Adjustable Desks on Adolescents’ Sitting in a Secondary School Classroom. AIMS Public Health 2016, 3, 274–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Descriptive Characteristics | Control | Intervention | p-Value INT vs. Control |
---|---|---|---|
N | 27 | 22 | |
Age, years | 9.7 (0.4) | 9.8 (0.3) | 0.66 |
Boys, % | 46.2 | 50.0 | 0.79 |
Ethnicity | |||
South Asian, N (%) | 24 (88.5) | 10 (45.5) | <0.01 |
White British, N (%) | 2 (7.7) | 11 (50) | <0.01 |
Other, N (%) | 1 (3.8) | 1 (4.5) | 0.90 |
BMI z-score (kg/m2) | 0.40 (1.35) | 0.34 (1.42) | 0.90 |
BMI categories (%) | |||
% Underweight | 3.9 | 9.1 | 0.45 |
% Normal | 61.5 | 63.6 | 0.88 |
% Overweight | 11.5 | 13.6 | 0.83 |
% Obese | 23.1 | 18.2 | 0.67 |
activPAL data | |||
Valid weekdays, N † | 6.0 (2.0) | 5.0 (0.3) | 0.23 |
Class time wear time, mins/day † | 309.9 (21.3) | 305.0 (5.5) | <0.01 |
Class time sitting, % of wear time | 73.9 (1.8) | 70.4 (2.9) | 0.28 |
Class time standing, % of wear time | 17.2 (7.6) | 21.5 (10.9) | 0.11 |
Class time stepping, % of wear time † | 9.0 (2.8) | 8.8 (2.8) | 0.57 |
Class time sit-to-stand transitions, p/h of wear time | 7.1 (2.5) | 8.4 (3.0) | 0.09 |
After school wear time, mins/day | 394.6 (42.6) | 424.2 (26.4) | 0.07 |
After school sitting, % of wear time | 69.7 (11.7) | 70.6 (7.1) | 0.74 |
Full day wear time, mins/day † | 892.1 (59.2) | 942.0 (40.9) | <0.01 |
Full day sitting, % of wear time | 72.9 (3.8) | 68.3 (1.9) | 0.32 |
Behavior-related mental health | |||
Total score, max score of 40 | 7.6 (5.1) | 9.6 (5.9) | 0.22 |
Musculoskeletal discomfort | |||
Whole body, mean of all scales * | 1.9 (1.8, 2.2) | 1.8 (1.5, 2.1) | 0.40 |
Upper limb, sum score † | 4.0 (2.0) | 3.0 (2.0) | 0.07 |
Neck and back, sum score † | 4.0 (3.0) | 3.0 (2.0) | 0.43 |
Lower limb, sum score | 6.5 (0.5) | 6.3 (0.5) | 0.76 |
Cognitive function | |||
Stroop test, reaction time (ms) † Control N = 20, intervention N = 20 | 497.0 (239.0) | 441.5 (235.0) | 0.82 |
Corsi Block Tapping test, score out of 12 Control N = 25, intervention N = 22 | 4.2 (1.4) | 4.4 (1.3) | 0.52 |
Control a | Intervention b | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Baseline | 4 Months | 8 Months | Baseline | 4 Months | 8 Months | |||||||
% | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | % | N | |
activPAL | 96 | 27 | 75 | 21 | 79 | 22 | 81 | 22 | 63 | 17 | 56 | 15 |
Behavior-related mental health | 96 | 27 | 81 | 26 | 89 | 25 | 81 | 22 | 74 | 20 | 81 | 22 |
Musculoskeletal discomfort | 96 | 27 | 81 | 25 | 93 | 26 | 81 | 22 | 81 | 22 | 78 | 21 |
Cognitive function | 71 | 20 | 74 | 18 | 68 | 19 | 74 | 20 | 63 | 17 | 63 | 17 |
Time-Point | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Baseline | 4 Months | 8 Months | |||||||
Outcome | β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p |
Class time | |||||||||
Wear time | −9.80 | (−17.01,−2.58) | 0.008 | −21.99 | (−30.18,−13.81) | 0.001 | −11.39 | (−19.79,−2.99) | 0.008 |
Sitting time, % of wear time | −3.57 | (−9.83,2.70) | 0.265 | −25.34 | (−32.25,−18.43) | 0.001 | −19.99 | (−27.05,−12.94) | 0.001 |
Standing time, % of wear time | 4.36 | (−0.96,9.68) | 0.108 | 25.74 | (19.91,31.58) | 0.001 | 17.82 | (11.88,23.76) | 0.001 |
Stepping time, % of wear time | −0.81 | (−2.62,1.01) | 0.384 | −0.26 | (−2.28,1.75) | 0.798 | 2.21 | (0.15,4.27) | 0.035 |
Sit-to-stand transitions, p/h wear time | 1.37 | (−0.05,2.80) | 0.058 | 2.92 | (1.33,4.51) | 0.001 | 4.62 | (2.99,6.24) | 0.001 |
After school | |||||||||
Sitting, % of wear time | 0.97 | (−4.74,6.68) | 0.739 | 3.7 | (−2.50,9.90) | 0.242 | 1.29 | (−5.17,7.75) | 0.696 |
Standing, % WT | 1.07 | (−0.88,3.02) | 0.283 | −0.25 | (−3.72,3.22) | 0.887 | 3.55 | (−0.37,7.48) | 0.076 |
Stepping, % WT | 0.61 | (−1.28,2.49) | 0.529 | −2.30 | (−5.58,0.98) | 0.169 | −3.73 | (−0.03,−7.43) | 0.048 |
Full Day | |||||||||
Wear time, mins | 59.9 | (17.79,102.02) | 0.005 | 7.49 | (−38.94,53.93) | 0.752 | 12.48 | (−35.93,60.89) | 0.613 |
Sitting time, % of wear time | −1.00 | (−5.69,3.69) | 0.675 | −7.67 | (−12.77,−2.57) | 0.003 | −5.52 | (−10.84,−0.19) | 0.042 |
Standing time, % of wear time | 1.3 | (−2.07,4.68) | 0.45 | 5.78 | (2.03,9.53) | 0.003 | 8.78 | (5.16,12.40) | 0.001 |
Stepping time, % of wear time | −0.29 | (−2.62,2.03) | 0.805 | −0.87 | (−3.38,1.65) | 0.498 | −0.20 | (−2.81,2.42) | 0.883 |
Sit-to-stand transitions, p/hr wear time | 0.6 | (−0.36,1.56) | 0.222 | 1.44 | (0.36,2.52) | 0.009 | 1.36 | (0.29,2.43) | 0.013 |
Time-Point | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Baseline | 4 Months | 8 Months | |||||||
Outcome | β | 95% CI | p | β | 95% CI | p | B | 95% CI | p |
Behavior-related mental health | |||||||||
Total score | 2.06 | (−0.65,4.78) | 0.136 | 5.31 | (2.55,8.08) | 0.001 | 7.92 | (5.18,10.66) | 0.001 |
Musculoskeletal discomfort | |||||||||
Whole body | −0.08 | (−0.43,0.26) | 0.632 | −0.27 | (−0.62,0.08) | 0.132 | −0.07 | (−0.42,0.29) | 0.710 |
Upper Limb, combined score | −0.41 | (−1.11,0.30) | 0.262 | −0.38 | (−1.10,0.35) | 0.310 | −0.08 | (−0.81,0.64) | 0.818 |
Neck and back, combined score | −0.23 | (−1.14,0.68) | 0.618 | −0.79 | (−1.72,0.15) | 0.099 | −0.09 | (−1.02,0.84) | 0.851 |
Lower Limb, combined score | −0.13 | (−1.55,1.28) | 0.852 | −0.39 | (−1.85,1.07) | 0.603 | 0.08 | (−1.36,1.53) | 0.911 |
Cognitive function | |||||||||
Corsi Block Tapping Control N = 20, INT N = 20) | 0.21 | (−0.52,0.94) | 0.573 | −0.33 | (−1.08,0.43) | 0.398 | 0.11 | (−0.64,0.86) | 0.769 |
Stroop, reaction time (Control N = 25, INT N = 22) | 25.43 | (−97.35,148.22) | 0.685 | 133.67 | (3.72,263.62) | 0.044 | 37.37 | (−92.58,167.32) | 0.573 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Sherry, A.P.; Pearson, N.; Ridgers, N.D.; Johnson, W.; Barber, S.E.; Bingham, D.D.; Nagy, L.C.; Clemes, S.A. Impacts of a Standing Desk Intervention within an English Primary School Classroom: A Pilot Controlled Trial. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 7048. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197048
Sherry AP, Pearson N, Ridgers ND, Johnson W, Barber SE, Bingham DD, Nagy LC, Clemes SA. Impacts of a Standing Desk Intervention within an English Primary School Classroom: A Pilot Controlled Trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(19):7048. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197048
Chicago/Turabian StyleSherry, Aron P., Natalie Pearson, Nicola D. Ridgers, William Johnson, Sally E. Barber, Daniel D. Bingham, Liana C. Nagy, and Stacy A. Clemes. 2020. "Impacts of a Standing Desk Intervention within an English Primary School Classroom: A Pilot Controlled Trial" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 19: 7048. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197048
APA StyleSherry, A. P., Pearson, N., Ridgers, N. D., Johnson, W., Barber, S. E., Bingham, D. D., Nagy, L. C., & Clemes, S. A. (2020). Impacts of a Standing Desk Intervention within an English Primary School Classroom: A Pilot Controlled Trial. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(19), 7048. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17197048