Low-cost workplace interventions are required to reduce prolonged sitting in office workers as this may improve employees’ health and well-being. This study aimed to assess the acceptability and feasibility of an e-health intervention to reduce prolonged sitting among sedentary UK-based office workers. Secondary aims were to describe preliminary changes in employee health, mood and work productivity after using an e-health intervention. Healthy, university office workers (n = 14) completed this study. An 8 week randomised crossover design was used, consisting of two trials: Intervention (computer-based prompts) and Control. Eligibility and retention rates were recorded to assess the feasibility of the trial and interviews were conducted following the intervention to explore its acceptability. Sitting, standing and stepping were objectively assessed prior to and during week 8 of each trial. Before and after each trial, measurements of vascular function, cerebrovascular function, mood and work productivity were obtained. This study had eligibility and retention rates of 54.5% and 77.8%, respectively. Participants expressed a lack of autonomy and disruption to their workflow when using the e-health intervention, raising concerns over its acceptability and long-term implementation. Preliminary data indicate that the intervention may improve the patterning of activity accrued during work hours, with increases in the number of standing and stepping bouts completed, in addition to improving vascular function. This e-health intervention is feasible to deliver in a cohort of university office workers. However, adaptations to its implementation, such as personalised settings, are needed to increase acceptability before larger trials can be conducted.

Background: Call agents spend ~ 90% of their working day seated, which may negatively impact health, productivity, and wellbeing. This study aimed to explore the acceptability and feasibility of a multi-component workplace intervention targeting increased activity and decreased prolonged sitting in the contact centre setting prior to a full-scale effectiveness trial. Methods: An 8-week non-randomised pre-post feasibility study was conducted. Using a mixed methods approach, focus groups and interviews were thematically analysed to explore the acceptability and feasibility of key study phases, and provide context to agents’ process evaluation and survey responses. The multi-component intervention, conducted in a single call centre, included height-adjustable workstations, emails, education and training sessions, and support from team leaders and a workplace champion. Results: Six (of 20) team leaders were recruited, with 17 of 84 call agents (78% female, 39.3 ± 11.9 years) completing baseline assessments and 13 completing follow-up. High workload influenced recruitment. Call agents perceived assessments as acceptable, though strategies are needed to enhance fidelity. Education sessions, height-adjustable workstations and emails were perceived as the most effective components; however, height-adjustable hot-desks were not perceived as feasible in this setting. Conclusions: This study has identified unique, pragmatic considerations for conducting a multi-level, multi-component PA and SB intervention and associated evaluation in highly sedentary call agents in the challenging contact centre setting. The intervention was largely perceived positively, with call agents and team leaders describing numerous perceived positive effects on behavioural, health and work-related outcomes. Findings will be of value to researchers attempting to intervene in contact centres and will be used by the current authors to design a subsequent trial.

Contact centre call agents are highly sedentary at work, which can negatively affect cardio-metabolic health. This qualitative cross-sectional study explored factors influencing call agents’ workplace physical activity (PA) and sedentary behaviour (SB), and perspectives on strategies to help agents move more and sit less at work. Semi-structured interviews and focus groups with call agents (n = 20), team leaders (n = 11) and senior staff (n = 12) across four contact centres were guided by the socio-ecological model and analysed thematically. Agents offered insights into the impact of high occupational sitting and low PA on their physical and mental health, and factors influencing their motivation to move more and sit less at work. Team leaders, although pivotal in influencing behaviours, identified their own workload, and agents’ requirement to meet targets, as factors influencing their ability to promote agents to move more and sit less at work. Further, senior team leaders offered a broad organisational perspective on influential factors, including business needs and the importance of return on investment from PA and SB interventions. Unique factors, including continuous monitoring of productivity metrics and personal time, a physical connection to their workstation, and low autonomy over their working practices, seemed to limit call agents’ opportunity to move more and sit less at work. Proposed strategies included acknowledgement of PA and SB within policy and job roles, height-adjustable workstations, education and training sessions and greater interpersonal support. Additionally, measuring the impact of interventions was perceived to be key for developing a business case and enhancing organisational buy-in. Multi-level interventions embedded into current working practices appear important for the multiple stakeholders, while addressing concerns regarding productivity.

Sitting for prolonged periods of time impairs people’s health. Prior research has mainly investigated sitting behavior on an aggregate level, for example, by analyzing total sitting time per day. By contrast, taking a dynamic approach, here we conceptualize sitting behavior as a continuous chain of sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions. We use multilevel time-to-event analysis to analyze the timing of these transitions. We analyze ∼30,000 objectively measured posture transitions from 156 people during work time. Results indicate that the temporal dynamics of sit-to-stand transitions differ from stand-to-sit transitions, and that people are quicker to switch postures later in the workday, and quicker to stand up after having been more active in the recent hours. We found no evidence for associations with physical fitness. Altogether, these findings provide insights into the origins of people’s stand-up and sit-down decisions, show that sitting behavior is fundamentally different from exercise behavior, and provide pointers for the development of interventions.

This feasibility study evaluated the effects of an individual-level intervention to target office workers total and prolonged sedentary behaviour during working hours, using an e-health smartphone application. A three-arm (Prompt-30 or 60 min Intervention arm and a No-Prompt Comparison arm), quasi-randomised intervention was conducted over 12 weeks. Behavioural outcomes (worktime sitting, standing, stepping, prolonged sitting, and physical activity) were monitored using accelerometers and anthropometrics measured at baseline, 6 weeks and 12 weeks. Cardiometabolic measures were taken at baseline and 12 weeks. Fifty-six office workers (64% female) completed baseline assessments. The Prompt-60 arm was associated with a reduction in occupational sitting time at 6 (−46.8 min/8 h workday [95% confidence interval = −86.4, −6.6], p < 0.05) and 12 weeks (−69.6 min/8 h workday [−111.0, −28.2], p < 0.05) relative to the No-Prompt Comparison arm. Sitting was primarily replaced with standing in both arms (p > 0.05). Both Intervention arms reduced time in prolonged sitting bouts at 12 weeks (Prompt-30: −27.0 [−99.0, 45.0]; Prompt-60: −25.8 [−98.4, 47.4] min/8 h workday; both p > 0.05). There were no changes in steps or cardiometabolic risk. Findings highlight the potential of a smartphone e-health application, suggesting 60 min prompts may present an optimal frequency to reduce total occupational sedentary behaviour.

This qualitative synthesis explores the experiences of UK communities facing growing health risks from climate change and extreme weather. The eight included studies show the profound impacts of extreme weather events such as floods on mental health, including challenges to self-identity and anxiety from the fear of flooding returning. Included data reveal individual and household impacts of extreme weather are mediated by a complex interaction of institutional support, community support, gender inequalities and personal agency. These factors are assessed against the backdrop of broader concepts in the social science and adaptation literature, including the role of the state, the inseparability of nature and society, the overlooked role of social structure, and environmental justice. It is argued that the use of qualitative synthesis methods in this topic area allows for an interconnected and context-sensitive analysis of the health impacts of climate change facing communities, diverging from other analytical approaches through inclusion of considerations such as social power, community dynamics, and the inter-relation of institutional action, community cohesion and individual agency. The resulting findings show how locally specific and highly contextual qualitative data can be used by those seeking to understand health risks from climate change within a locality.