•  
  •  
 

THE EFFECTS OF A SIT-TO-STAND WORKSTATION ON BODY COMPOSITION OVER 12 MONTHS

Abstract

THE EFFECTS OF A SIT-TO-STAND WORKSTATION ON BODY COMPOSITION OVER 12 MONTHS

Alex J. London1, Marlee Hearn1, Kelly Monaghan1, Larissa Boyd1, & Melissa Powers1 1University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, Oklahoma

The nature of office work promotes a sedentary lifestyle associated with an increased risk of obesity. Many interventions have attempted to combat physical inactivity among sedentary office workers. The sit-to-stand (STS) workstation is a modality aimed at improving workers’ physical health. PURPOSE: Therefore, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of using a STS workstation on body composition over the course of 12 months. METHODS: All participants were volunteer faculty and staff of the University of Central Oklahoma randomly assigned to a control (n= 19) or STS workstation intervention (n= 13) group. Participants of both groups consented to a pre-test, 6-month, and 12-month dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan to assess variables of body composition including, but not limited to; body fat percentage (BF%), total fat mass, total lean mass, total bone mineral density (BMD), and the ratio of android to gynoid(A/G) fat. The STS intervention group was tasked with standing at least two hours per work day, while the control group was instructed to continue their day as normal without incorporating the use of a STS workstation. RESULTS: Multiple 2 x 3 mixed-design ANOVA tests were conducted to examine the effects a STS workstation has on body composition over time (pre-, 6mos., and 12mos.).There were no significant interactions between time and group for total BF% (F(2, 60)= .17, p > .05), total fat mass (F(2, 60)= .26, p > .05), total lean mass (F(2, 60)= .51, p > .05), total BMD (F(2, 60)= .15, p > .05), and A/G ratio (F(2, 60)= .37, p > .05). Additionally, there was not a significant main effect found for groups among any of the five body composition variables. A significant main effect for time was found for total BMD (F(2, 60)= 11.6, p < .001) and A/G ratio (F(2, 60)= 3.2, p = .046), but not for BF%, total fat mass, and total lean mass. CONCLUSION: The implementation of a STS workstation did not significantly improve body composition when compared to the control group. Future research is needed to determine if utilizing a STS workstation improves other body composition variables.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: This study was funded by the University of Central Oklahoma, Research and Sponsored Programs office.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS