Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Active Workstations to Fight Sedentary Behaviour

  • Systematic Review
  • Published:
Sports Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The impact of active workstations has been studied in several settings, and several outcomes have been investigated. However, the effects on health, work performance, quality of life, etc., have never been systematically reviewed.

Objective

To evaluate the existing literature about active workstations and their possible positive health and work performance effects.

Data Sources

We searched the electronic databases PubMed and Web of Science (up until 28 February 2014). The search terms we used were ‘active workstation’, ‘standing workstation’, ‘standing desk’, ‘stand up workstation’, ‘stand up desk’, ‘walking desk’, ‘walking workstation’, ‘treadmill workstation’, ‘treadmill desk’, ‘cycling workstation’, ‘cycling desk’ and ‘bike desk’, in combination with ‘health’, ‘quality of life’, ‘cognition’, ‘computer task performance’, ‘absenteeism’, ‘productivity’, ‘academic achievement’, ‘cognitive decline’, and ‘independent living’. In addition, we searched the reference lists of relevant published articles.

Study Selection

Randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials and non-randomized non-controlled trials investigating the introduction of active workstations in humans were included in this systematic review. Only original studies were included, and we did not accept studies combining the introduction of active workstations with other interventions. Outcomes concerning health, energy expenditure, cognition, quality of life and work performance were included.

Results

We included 32 studies, of which five were longitudinal studies in school-aged children, 10 were longitudinal studies in adults and 17 were non-longitudinal studies in adults. Sixteen studies investigated standing desks, 15 investigated walking desks, and one investigated a cycling workstation. The general findings were decreased sitting time, increased energy expenditure, a positive effect on several health markers, no detrimental effect on work performance, no acute effect on cognitive function and no straightforward findings concerning computer task performance.

Conclusion

The implementation of active workstations might contribute to improving people’s health and physical activity levels. The effect of the use of these active workstations on cognition and applied work tasks, such as computer task performance, needs further investigation before conclusions can be drawn. Another aspect that needs further investigation is the implementation of the different active workstations in all age groups.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. World Health Organisation. Health topics: physical activity; 2014. http://www.who.int/topics/physical_activity/en/. Accessed 21 Feb 2014.

  2. National Institutes of Health. What is physical activity? 2011. http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/phys/. Accessed 28 Feb 2014.

  3. Dishman RK, Berthoud H, Booth FW. Neurobiology of exercise. Obesity. 2006;14(3):345–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. World Health Organization. Global recommendations on physical activity for health. 2010 contract no.: ISBN 978 92 4 159 997 9.

  5. Pedersen SJ, Cooley PD, Mainsbridge C. An e-health intervention designed to increase workday energy expenditure by reducing prolonged occupational sitting habits. Work. 2013;. doi:10.3233/WOR-131644.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. van Praag H. Neurogenesis and exercise: past and future directions. Neuromol Med. 2008;10(2):128–40. doi:10.1007/s12017-008-8028-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Donnelly JE, Lambourne K. Classroom-based physical activity, cognition, and academic achievement. Prev Med. 2011;52(Suppl 1):S36–42. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.01.021.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van den Heuvel SG, Boshuizen HC, Hildebrandt VH, et al. Effect of sporting activity on absenteeism in a working population. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39(3):e15. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2004.013052.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Brown HE, Gilson ND, Burton NW. Does physical activity impact on presenteeism and other indicators of workplace well-being? Sports Med. 2011;41(3):249–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Laurin D, Verreault R, Lindsay J, et al. Physical activity and risk of cognitive impairment and dementia in elderly persons. Arch Neurol. 2001;58:498–504.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tak E, Kuiper R, Chorus A, et al. Prevention of onset and progression of basic ADL disability by physical activity in community dwelling older adults: a meta-analysis. Ageing Res Rev. 2013;12(1):329–38. doi:10.1016/j.arr.2012.10.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. World Health Organization. Prevalence of insufficient physical activity; 2008. http://www.who.int/gho/ncd/risk_factors/physical_activity/en/. Accessed 17 Oct 2013.

  13. Cadilhac DA, Cumming TB, Sheppard L, et al. The economic benefits of reducing physical inactivity: an Australian example. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2011;8:99. doi:10.1186/1479-5868-8-99.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Allender S, Foster C, Scarborough P, et al. The burden of physical activity-related ill health in the UK. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2007;61(4):344–8. doi:10.1136/jech.2006.050807.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sedentary Behaviour Research Network. Standardized use of the terms “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviours”. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2012;37:540–2.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Marshall SJ, Ramirez E. Reducing sedentary behavior: a new paradigm in physical activity promotion. Am J Lifestyle Med. 2011;5(6):518–30. doi:10.1177/1559827610395487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Plotnikoff R, Karunamuni N. Reducing sitting time: the new workplace health priority. Arch Environ Occup Health. 2012;67(3):125–7. doi:10.1080/19338244.2012.697407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Eurobarometer. Sport and physical activity; 2010.

  19. British Heart Foundation. Physical activity statistics 2012. Factors influencing physical activity, chap. 6; 2012.

  20. Oja P, Bull FC, Fogelholm M, et al. Physical activity recommendations for health: what should Europe do? BMC Public Health. 2010;10:10. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-10.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. de Geus B, Van Hoof E, Aerts I, et al. Cycling to work: influence on indexes of health in untrained men and women in Flanders. Coronary heart disease and quality of life. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2008;18(4):498–510.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2009;6(7).

  23. Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network. Critical appraisal: notes and checklists. http://www.sign.ac.uk/methodology/checklists.html. Accessed 23 Sept 2013.

  24. Effective Public Health Practice Project. Quality assessment tool for quantitative studies; 2010. http://www.ephpp.ca/PDF/Quality%20Assessment%20Tool_2010_2.pdf. Accessed 8 Oct 2013.

  25. Straker L, Abbott RA, Heiden M, et al. Sit-stand desks in call centres: associations of use and ergonomics awareness with sedentary behavior. Appl Ergon. 2013;44(4):517–22. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2012.11.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wilks S, Mortimer M, Nylen P. The introduction of sit-stand worktables; aspects of attitudes, compliance and satisfaction. Appl Ergon. 2006;37(3):359–65. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2005.06.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Burford EM, Botter J, Commissaris D. The effect of dynamic workstations on the performance of various computer and office-based tasks. In: Duffy VG, editor. Digital human modeling and applications in health, safety, ergonomics, and risk management. Human Body Modeling and Ergonomics, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8026. Berlin: Springer; 2013. p. 205–12.

  28. Dunstan DW, Wiesner G, Eakin EG, et al. Reducing office workers’ sitting time: rationale and study design for the Stand Up Victoria cluster randomized trial. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1057.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cardon G, De Clercq D, De Bourdeaudhuij I, et al. Sitting habits in elementary schoolchildren: a traditional versus a “Moving school”. Patient Educ Couns. 2004;54(2):133–42. doi:10.1016/s0738-3991(03)00215-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Robertson MM, Ciriello VM, Garabet AM. Office ergonomics training and a sit-stand workstation: effects on musculoskeletal and visual symptoms and performance of office workers. Appl Ergon. 2013;44(1):73–85. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2012.05.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Lytle TL, Wenos DL, Ritttenhouse MA. The effects of the walking workstation on work productivity and selected physiological variables; 2011.

  32. Benden ME, Blake JJ, Wendel ML. The impact of stand-biased desks in classrooms on calorie expenditure in children. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(8):1433–6.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Blake JJ, Benden ME, Wendel ML. Using stand/sit workstations in classrooms: lessons learned from a pilot study in Texas. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2012;18(5):412–5. doi:10.1097/PHH.0b013e3182215048.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hinckson EA, Aminian S, Ikeda E, et al. Acceptability of standing workstations in elementary schools: a pilot study. Prev Med. 2013;56(1):82–5. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2012.10.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lanningham-Foster L, Foster RC, McCrady SK, et al. Changing the school environment to increase physical activity in children. Obesity. 2008;16(8):1849–53. doi:10.1038/oby.2008.282.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Koepp GA, Snedden BJ, Flynn L, et al. Feasibility analysis of standing desks for sixth graders. Infant Child Adolesc Nutr. 2012;4(2):89–92. doi:10.1177/1941406412439414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. McAlpine DA, Manohar CU, McCrady SK. An office-place stepping device to promote workplace physical activity. Br J Sports Med. 2007;41:903–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Carr LJ, Walaska KA, Marcus BH. Feasibility of a portable pedal exercise machine for reducing sedentary time in the workplace. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46(6):430–5. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2010.079574.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Botter J, Burford EM, Commissaris D. The biomechanical and physiological effect of two dynamic workstations. In: Duffy VG, editor. Digital human modeling and applications in health, safety, ergonomics, and risk management. Human body modeling and ergonomics. Berlin: Springer; 2013. p. 196–204.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  40. Ben-Ner A, Paulson DF, Koepp GA. Treadmill workstations: the effects of walking while working on physical activity and work performance. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(2):e88620.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Thompson WG, Koepp GA, Levine JA. Increasing physician activity with treadmill desks. Work. 2013 (Epub ahead of print).

  42. Alkhajah TA, Reeves MM, Eakin EG, et al. Sit-stand workstations: a pilot intervention to reduce office sitting time. Am J Prev Med. 2012;43(3):298–303. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.05.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Pronk NP, Katz AS, Lowry M. Reducing occupational sitting time and improving worker health: the take-a-stand project, 2011. Prev Chronic Dis. 2012;9:110323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Thompson WG, Foster RC, Eide DS et al. Feasibility of a walking workstation to increase daily walking. Br J Sports Med. 2008;42(3):225–8 (discussion 228). doi:10.1136/bjsm.2007.039479.

  45. Gilson ND, Suppini A, Ryde GC, et al. Does the use of standing ‘hot’ desks change sedentary work time in an open plan office? Prev Med. 2012;54(1):65–7. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.10.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Grunseit AC, Chau JY, van der Ploeg HP. “Thinking on your feet”: a qualitative evaluation of sit-stand desks in an Australian workplace. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:365–75.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. John D, Thompson DL, Raynor H. Treadmill workstations: a worksite physical activity intervention in overweight and obese office workers. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(8):1034–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Koepp GA, Manohar CU, McCrady-Spitzer SK, et al. Treadmill desks: a 1-year prospective trial. Obesity. 2013;21(4):705–11. doi:10.1002/oby.20121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Chester MR, Rys MJ, Konz SA. Leg swelling, comfort and fatigue when sitting, standing and sit/standing. Int J Ind Ergon. 2002;29:289–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ebara T, Kubo T, Inoue T. Effects of adjustable sit-stand VDT workstations on workers’ musculoskeletal discomfort, alertness and performance. Ind Health. 2008;46:497–505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hedge A, Jagdeo J, Agarwal A, et al. Sitting or standing for computer work—does a negative-tilt keyboard tray make a difference? Proc Hum Fact Ergon Soc Annu Meet. 2005;49(8):808–11. doi:10.1177/154193120504900804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Reiff C, Marlatt K, Dengel DR. Difference in caloric expenditure in sitting versus standing desks. J Phys Act Health. 2012;9:1009–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Alderman BL, Olson RL, Mattina DM. Cognitive function during low intensity walking: a test of the treadmill workstation. J Phys Act Health. 2013.

  54. Cox RH, Guth J, Siekemeyer L. Metabolic cost and speech quality while using an active workstation. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(3):332–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Funk RE, Taylor ML, Creekmur CC. Effect of walking speed on typing performance using an active workstation. Percept Motor Skills. 2012;115(1):309–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. John D, Bassett DR, Thompson DL, et al. Effect of using a treadmill workstation on performance of simulated office work tasks. J Phys Act Health. 2009;6(5):617–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Ohlinger SA, Horn TS, Berg WP, et al. The effect of active workstation use on measures of cognition, attention, and motor skill. J Phys Act Health. 2011;8(1):119–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Straker L, Levine J, Campbell A. The effects of walking and cycling computer workstations on keyboard and mouse performance. Hum Factors. 2009;51(6):44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Thompson WG, Levine JA. Productivity of transcriptionists using a treadmill desk. Work. 2011;40(4):473–7. doi:10.3233/WOR-2011-1258.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Hasegawa T, Inoue K, Tsutsue O. Effects of a sit-stand schedule on a light repetitive task. Int J Ind Ergon. 2001;28:219–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Buckley JP, Mellor DD, Morris M, et al. Standing-based office work shows encouraging signs of attenuating post-prandial glycaemic excursion. Occup Environ Med. 2014;71(2):109–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Levine JA, Miller JM. The energy expenditure of using a “walk-and-work” desk for office workers with obesity. Br J Sports Med. 2007;41(9):558–61. doi:10.1136/bjsm.2006.032755.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Speck RM, Schmitz KH. Energy expenditure comparison: a pilot study of standing instead of sitting at work for obesity prevention. Prev Med. 2011;52(3–4):283–4. doi:10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.02.002.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Hillman CH, Erickson KI, Kramer AF. Be smart, exercise your heart: exercise effects on brain and cognition. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2008;9:58–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Hillman CH, Kamijo K, Scudder M. A review of chronic and acute physical activity participation on neuroelectric measures of brain health and cognition during childhood. Prev Med. 2011;52:521–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

No sources of funding were used in the preparation of this review. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this review.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Physiology and Sports Medicine, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Tine Torbeyns, Inge Bos & Romain Meeusen

  2. Department of Physical Therapy Education, Elon University, Elon, NC, 27244, USA

    Stephen Bailey

  3. School of Public Health, Tropical Medicine and Rehabilitation Sciences, James Cook University, Queensland, Australia

    Romain Meeusen

Authors
  1. Tine Torbeyns
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephen Bailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Inge Bos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Romain Meeusen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Romain Meeusen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Torbeyns, T., Bailey, S., Bos, I. et al. Active Workstations to Fight Sedentary Behaviour. Sports Med 44, 1261–1273 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0202-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-014-0202-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation