There is a growing body of research into the total amount and patterns of sitting, standing and stepping in office-based workers and few studies using objectively measured sitting and standing. Understanding these patterns may identify daily times opportune for interventions to displace sitting with activity. A sample of office-based workers (n = 164) residing in England were fitted with thigh-worn ActivPal accelerometers and devices were worn 24 hours a day for five consecutive days, always including Saturday and Sunday and during bathing and sleeping. Daily amounts and patterns of time spent sitting, standing, stepping and step counts and frequency of sit/stand transitions, recorded by the ActivPal accelerometer, were reported. Total sitting/standing time was similar on weekdays (10.6/4.1 hrs) and weekends (10.6/4.3 hrs). Total step count was also similar over weekdays (9682 ± 3872) and weekends (9518 ± 4615). The highest physical activity levels during weekdays were accrued at 0700 to 0900, 1200 to 1400, and 1700 to 1900; and during the weekend at 1000 to 1700. During the weekday the greatest amount of sitting was accrued at 0900 to 1200, 1400 to 1700, and 2000 to 2300, and on the weekend between 1800 and 2300. During the weekday the greatest amount of standing was accrued between 0700 and 1000 and 1700 and 2100, and on the weekend between 1000 and 1800. On the weekday the highest number of sit/stand transitions occurred between 0800 to 0900 and remained consistently high until 1800. On the weekend, the highest number occurred between 1000 to 1400 and 1900 to 2000. Office based-workers demonstrate high levels of sitting during both the working week and weekend. Interventions that target the working day and the evenings (weekday and weekend) to displace sitting with activity may offer most promise for reducing population levels of sedentary behaviour and increasing physical activity levels, in office-based workers residing in England.

Office-based workers spend a large proportion of the day sitting and tend to have low overall activity levels. Despite some evidence that features of the external physical environment are associated with physical activity, little is known about the influence of the spatial layout of the internal environment on movement, and the majority of data use self-report. This study investigated associations between objectively-measured sitting time and activity levels and the spatial layout of office floors in a sample of UK office-based workers. Participants wore activPAL accelerometers for at least three consecutive workdays. Primary outcomes were steps and proportion of sitting time per working hour. Primary exposures were office spatial layout, which was objectively-measured by deriving key spatial variables: ‘distance from each workstation to key office destinations’, ‘distance from participant’s workstation to all other workstations’, ‘visibility of co-workers’, and workstation ‘closeness’. 131 participants from 10 organisations were included. Fifty-four per cent were female, 81% were white, and the majority had a managerial or professional role (72%) in their organisation. The average proportion of the working hour spent sitting was 0.7 (SD 0.15); participants took on average 444 (SD 210) steps per working hour. Models adjusted for confounders revealed significant negative associations between step count and distance from each workstation to all other office destinations (e.g., B = −4.66, 95% CI: −8.12, −1.12, p < 0.01) and nearest office destinations (e.g., B = −6.45, 95% CI: −11.88, −0.41, p < 0.05) and visibility of workstations when standing (B = −2.35, 95% CI: −3.53, −1.18, p < 0.001). The magnitude of these associations was small. There were no associations between spatial variables and sitting time per work hour. Contrary to our hypothesis, the further participants were from office destinations the less they walked, suggesting that changing the relative distance between workstations and other destinations on the same floor may not be the most fruitful target for promoting walking and reducing sitting in the workplace. However, reported effect sizes were very small and based on cross-sectional analyses. The approaches developed in this study could be applied to other office buildings to establish whether a specific office typology may yield more promising results.

Habitual behaviours are learned responses that are triggered automatically by associated environmental cues. The unvarying nature of most workplace settings makes workplace physical activity a prime candidate for a habitual behaviour, yet the role of habit strength in occupational physical activity has not been investigated. Aims of the present study were to: (i) document occupational physical activity habit strength; and (ii) investigate associations between occupational activity habit strength and occupational physical activity levels. A sample of UK office-based workers (n = 116; 53% female, median age 40 years, SD 10.52) was fitted with activPAL accelerometers worn for 24 h on five consecutive days, providing an objective measure of occupational step counts, stepping time, sitting time, standing time and sit-to-stand transitions. A self-report index measured the automaticity of two occupational physical activities (“being active” (e.g., walking to printers and coffee machines) and “stair climbing”). Adjusted linear regression models investigated the association between occupational activity habit strength and objectively-measured occupational step counts, stepping time, sitting time, standing time and sit-to-stand transitions. Eighty-one per cent of the sample reported habits for “being active”, and 62% reported habits for “stair climbing”. In adjusted models, reported habit strength for “being active” were positively associated with average occupational sit-to-stand transitions per hour (B = 0.340, 95% CI: 0.053 to 0.627, p = 0.021). “Stair climbing” habit strength was unexpectedly negatively associated with average hourly stepping time (B = −0.01, 95% CI: −0.01 to −0.00, p = 0.006) and average hourly occupational step count (B = −38.34, 95% CI: −72.81 to −3.88, p = 0.030), which may reflect that people with stronger stair-climbing habits compensate by walking fewer steps overall. Results suggest that stair-climbing and office-based occupational activity can be habitual. Interventions might fruitfully promote habitual workplace activity, although, in light of potential compensation effects, such interventions should perhaps focus on promoting moderate-intensity activity.

(2015). Sitting less, moving more: the indoor built environment as a tool for change. Building Research & Information: Vol. 43, Physical activity, sedentary behaviour & the indoor built environment, pp. 561-565.

COVID-19 has affected most of our activities in multiple ways, with changing our working environment being one of them. This project explores measures for preventing or limiting the transmission of COVID-19 in indoor office workplaces, focusing on space and place by promoting healthy behaviours within those environments. Research comprised of a series of literature reviews using both systematic and narrative methods. Suggestions made from literature review were then split in a) top down guidance mainly from governmental guidance and b) bottom up guidance deriving mainly from the industry. Results were organised under three main themes: a) advice on surface interactions and virus viability); b) behavioural advice focusing on the return-to-work effects on psychological and mental health outcomes along with control measures and suggestions on preparing buildings to return-to-work during Covid-19 and c) advice focusing on thermal and ventilation conditions and how they affect virus transmission. The implications of COVID-19 for workspace are more relevant than ever. The project shed light a)to the interrelationship between individuals and their office space and how the latter influences workers and b) to the knowledge transfer from medical architecture to office design for Covid. This cross-disciplinary review raises questions that need to be considered in future studies inclusive of other topic areas apart from the ones discussed here, so as to generate interdisciplinary knowledge on other equally important fields of study which will impact companies that plan and design workspaces and the people who use it, promoting both healthy working environments and behaviours.