Office and call center workers ’ steps/day were among the lowest , while those of postal delivery workers were highest .
Office workers had the greatest ST and the lowest time in LPA both at work and during wakeful time .
Laborers had the lowest ST and spent a significantly greater proportion of their work time in LPA and MVPA .
Healthcare and protective services workers had higher levels of LPA at work compared to other occupations .
Workers in driving-based occupations tended to have a higher body mass index and blood pressure .
Conclusion This review identifies that occupational and wakeful time PA and ST differed between occupations .
Background With approximately 8 hours of one ’s waking day spent at work , occupational tasks and environments are important influencers on an individual ’s physical activity ( PA ) and sedentary behaviours .
Little research has compared device-measured physical activity , sedentary behaviour and cardiometabolic outcomes between occupational groups .
Objective To compare device-measured movement ( sedentary time [ ST ] , light intensity  physical activity [ LPA ] , moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity [ MVPA ] , and steps ) across occupations .
The secondary objective was to examine whether cardiometabolic and fitness outcomes differed by occupation .
What strategies do desk-based workers choose to reduce sitting time and how well do they work? Findings from a cluster randomised controlled trial
Background Large amounts of sitting at work have been identified as an emerging occupational health risk , and findings from intervention trials have been reported . However , few such reports have examined participant-selected strategies and their relationships with behaviour change . Methods The St and Up Victoria cluster-r and omised controlled trial was a workplace-delivered intervention comprising organisational , environmental and individual level behaviour change strategies aim ed at reducing sitting time in desk-based workers .  Sit-st and workstations were provided , and participants ( n = 134 ; intervention group only ) were guided by health coaches to identify strategies for the ‘ St and Up ’ , ‘ Sit Less ’ , and ‘ Move More ’ intervention targets , including how long they would st and using the workstation . Three-month workplace sitting and activity changes ( activPAL3-assessed total sitting , prolonged sitting ( i.e. , sitting ≥30 min continuously ) and purpose ful walking ) were evaluated in relation to the number ( regression analysis ) and types of strategies ( decision-tree analysis ) . Results Over 80 different strategies were nominated by participants . Each additional strategy nominated for the ‘ St and Up ’ intervention target ( i.e. number of strategies ) was associated with a reduction in prolonged sitting of 27.6 min/8-h workday ( 95 % CI : -53.1 , − 2.1 , p = 0.034 ) . Types of strategies were categorised into 13 distinct categories . Strategies that were task-based and phone-based were common across all three targets . The decision tree models did not select any specific strategy category as predicting changes in prolonged sitting ( ‘ St and Up ’ ) , however four strategy categories were identified as important for total sitting time ( ‘ Sit Less ’ ) and three strategy categories for purpose ful walking ( ‘ Moving More ’ ) . The uppermost nodes ( foremost predictors ) were nominating > 3 h/day of workstation st and ing ( reducing total workplace sitting ) and choosing a ‘ Move More ’ task-based strategy ( purpose ful walking ) . Conclusions Workers chose a wide range of strategies , with both strategy choice and strategy quantity appearing relevant to behavioural improvement . Findings support a tailored and pragmatic approach to encourage a change in sitting and activity in the workplace . Evaluating participant-selected strategies in the context of a successful intervention serves to highlight options that may prove feasible and effective in other desk-based workplace environments . Trial registration This trial was prospect ively registered with the Australian New Zeal and Clinical Trials register ( ACTRN12611000742976 ) on 15 July 2011
Office and call center workers ’ steps/day were among the lowest , while those of postal delivery workers were highest .
Office workers had the greatest ST and the lowest time in LPA both at work and during wakeful time .
Laborers had the lowest ST and spent a significantly greater proportion of their work time in LPA and MVPA .
Healthcare and protective services workers had higher levels of LPA at work compared to other occupations .
Workers in driving-based occupations tended to have a higher body mass index and blood pressure .
Conclusion This review identifies that occupational and wakeful time PA and ST differed between occupations .
Background With approximately 8 hours of one ’s waking day spent at work , occupational tasks and environments are important influencers on an individual ’s physical activity ( PA ) and sedentary behaviours .
Little research has compared device-measured physical activity , sedentary behaviour and cardiometabolic outcomes between occupational groups .
Objective To compare device-measured movement ( sedentary time [ ST ] , light intensity  physical activity [ LPA ] , moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activity [ MVPA ] , and steps ) across occupations .
The secondary objective was to examine whether cardiometabolic and fitness outcomes differed by occupation .