Sedentary BehaviorNCT04082624
Workplace Wellness: Improving Your Experience at Work
A study testing Nutrition condition, Affective condition and Instrumental condition in people with Sedentary Behavior and Obesity, run by University of Victoria at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
The primary objective of study was to compare affective (i.e., highlighted emotional benefits), instrumental (i.e., highlighted other health benefits), and self-regulation (i.e., demonstrated ways to plan, set goals, etc.) interventions in terms of their ability to motivate less sitting in the workplace. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Sedentary Behavior, Obesity
- What is being tested?
- Nutrition condition, Affective condition and Instrumental condition
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 116 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- Sep 2014to Apr 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- From a local workplace in Victoria
- Full-time employee (i.e., greater than 35 hours per week)
- Reported over 5.5 hours of sitting per day at work
- Agreed to attend the 3 intervention sessions
Who cannot join
- Not from a local workplace in Victoria
- Not a full-time employee (i.e., 35 hours or less per week)
- Reported less than 5.5 hours of sitting per day at work
- Did not agree to attend the 3 intervention sessions
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site
Behavioural Medicine Laboratory
Victoria, British Columbia, V8P 5C2
About this study
The primary objective of study was to compare affective (i.e., highlighted emotional benefits), instrumental (i.e., highlighted other health benefits), and self-regulation (i.e., demonstrated ways to plan, set goals, etc.) interventions in terms of their ability to motivate less sitting in the workplace. Research of this type is important because people sit for long periods of time at work which adversely affects their health and productivity.
It was hypothesized that the affective and self-regulation groups would sit less than the instrumental and control groups based on evidence indicating that affective attitude (i.e., emotional evaluation of the behavior) and self-regulation techniques tend to predict behavior.
- Conditions
- Sedentary Behavior, Obesity
- Being tested
- Nutrition condition, Affective condition, Instrumental condition, Self-regulation condition
- Medical subject headings
- Sedentary Behavior, Obesity
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Nutrition conditionBehavioural
Received nutritional information in in-person PowerPoint presentations.
Affective conditionBehavioural
Received information about affective benefits of less sitting in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations.
Instrumental conditionBehavioural
Received information about instrumental benefits of less sitting in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations.
Self-regulation conditionBehavioural
Learned how to self-regulate behavior to sit less in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Nutrition condition | Active comparator | Received nutrition information such as the comparison of nutritional information between orange juice and soda pop. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Receives: Behavioral: Nutrition condition |
| Affective condition | Experimental | Learned about the affective benefits (e.g., less depression) of reduced office sitting time through taking active breaks. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Receives: Behavioral: Affective condition |
| Instrumental condition | Experimental | Learned about instrumental benefits such as the relationship between sitting and cardiovascular disease and absenteeism at work. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Receives: Behavioral: Instrumental condition |
| Self-regulation condition | Experimental | Learned how to self-monitor their sedentary behavior and active breaks. They also learned how to create prompts/cues (e.g., sticky note reminder), problem solve to overcome barriers, action plan (i.e., specifying when, where, and how to do the behavior), and set goals in order to be less sedentary according to SMART (i.e., specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-oriented) principles. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. Receives: Behavioral: Self-regulation condition |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Sitting time
Average hours of sitting time per day at work
Measured: Twelve weeks post-baseline
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted9 Sep 2019
- Study startSep 2014
- Primary completionApr 2015
- Study completionApr 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Sedentary BehaviorStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 116 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Victoria
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ryan Rhodes, University of Victoria
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04082624
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 13-108
- Status last verified
- Sep 2019
- First submitted
- 4 Sep 2019
- Last updated
- 9 Sep 2019
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Lithopoulos A, Kaushal N, Beauchamp MR, Conner M, de Bruijn GJ, Latimer-Cheung AE, Rhodes RE. Changing Sedentary Behavior in the Office: A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing the Effect of Affective, Instrumental, and Self-Regulatory Messaging on Sitting. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2020 Nov;12(3):687-702. doi: 10.1111/aphw.12202. Epub 2020 May 19.
PubMed 32428341
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Sep 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Workplace Wellness: Improving Your Experience at Work
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04082624
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 13-108
- Conditions
- Sedentary Behavior, Obesity
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 116 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of VictoriaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Study start
- Sep 2014 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Apr 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Apr 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 9 Sep 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The primary objective of study was to compare affective (i.e., highlighted emotional benefits), instrumental (i.e., highlighted other health benefits), and self-regulation (i.e., demonstrated ways to plan, set goals, etc.) interventions in terms of their ability to motivate less sitting in the workplace. Research of this type is important because people sit for long periods of time at work which adversely affects their health and productivity.
It was hypothesized that the affective and self-regulation groups would sit less than the instrumental and control groups based on evidence indicating that affective attitude (i.e., emotional evaluation of the behavior) and self-regulation techniques tend to predict behavior.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Nutrition condition | Active comparator | Behavioral: Nutrition conditionReceived nutrition information such as the comparison of nutritional information between orange juice and soda pop. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. |
| Affective condition | Experimental | Behavioral: Affective conditionLearned about the affective benefits (e.g., less depression) of reduced office sitting time through taking active breaks. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. |
| Instrumental condition | Experimental | Behavioral: Instrumental conditionLearned about instrumental benefits such as the relationship between sitting and cardiovascular disease and absenteeism at work. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. |
| Self-regulation condition | Experimental | Behavioral: Self-regulation conditionLearned how to self-monitor their sedentary behavior and active breaks. They also learned how to create prompts/cues (e.g., sticky note reminder), problem solve to overcome barriers, action plan (i.e., specifying when, where, and how to do the behavior), and set goals in order to be less sedentary according to SMART (i.e., specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, time-oriented) principles. Received intervention following measurements at baseline, week 4, and week 8. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- From a local workplace in Victoria
- Full-time employee (i.e., greater than 35 hours per week)
- Reported over 5.5 hours of sitting per day at work
- Agreed to attend the 3 intervention sessions
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Not from a local workplace in Victoria
- Not a full-time employee (i.e., 35 hours or less per week)
- Reported less than 5.5 hours of sitting per day at work
- Did not agree to attend the 3 intervention sessions
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Nutrition conditionReceived nutritional information in in-person PowerPoint presentations. | Behavioural | Nutrition condition |
| Affective conditionReceived information about affective benefits of less sitting in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations. | Behavioural | Affective condition |
| Instrumental conditionReceived information about instrumental benefits of less sitting in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations. | Behavioural | Instrumental condition |
| Self-regulation conditionLearned how to self-regulate behavior to sit less in the workplace in in-person PowerPoint presentations. | Behavioural | Self-regulation condition |
Primary outcome
Sitting time
Time frame: Twelve weeks post-baseline
Average hours of sitting time per day at work
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Sep 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32428341Lithopoulos A, Kaushal N, Beauchamp MR, Conner M, de Bruijn GJ, Latimer-Cheung AE, Rhodes RE. Changing Sedentary Behavior in the Office: A Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing the Effect of Affective, Instrumental, and Self-Regulatory Messaging on Sitting. Appl Psychol Health Well Being. 2020 Nov;12(3):687-702. doi: 10.1111/aphw.12202. Epub 2020 May 19.
Related trials for Sedentary Behavior
Enrolling by invitation
Recreational Badminton, Sleep and Melatonin
Sedentary Behavior
Active, not recruiting
Future School of Comprehensive Well-Being
Learning, Comprehensive Wellbeing
RecruitingEarly Phase 1
Role of ET-1, Physical Activity, and Sedentary Behavior in Microvascular Dysfunction Following GDM
Gestational Diabetes, Endothelial Dysfunction
Recruiting
Acute Endocrine Responses to Aerobic and Anaerobic Exercise in Sedentary Women: A Comparative Analysis of Thyroid Hormones and Cortisol
Sedentary Behavior, Acute Exercise
Not yet recruiting
Wearable Ankle Power Training (WearAPT) for Enhanced Mobility in Aging
Sedentary Behavior / Physical Inactivity, Aged
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Nutrition condition, Affective condition and Instrumental condition in people with Sedentary Behavior and Obesity, run by University of Victoria at 1 site in Canada.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Sep 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Sitting time (time frame: Twelve weeks post-baseline). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT04082624, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Sep 2019.