A mixed method evaluation of a theory based intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in contact centres- the stand up for health stepped wedge feasibility study

INTRODUCTION: Contact centres have higher levels of sedentary behaviour than other office-based workplaces. Stand Up for Health (SUH) is a theory-based intervention developed using the 6SQuID framework to reduce sedentary behaviour in contact centre workers. The aim of this study was to test acceptability and feasibility of implementing SUH in UK contact centres.METHODS: The study was conducted in 2020-2022 (pre COVID and during lockdown) and used a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial design including a process evaluation. The intervention included working with contact centre managers to develop and implement a customised action plan aligning with SUH's theory of change. Workplace sedentary time, measured using activPAL™ devices, was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included productivity, mental wellbeing, musculoskeletal health and physical activity. Empirical estimates of between-centre standard deviation and within-centre standard deviation of outcomes from pre-lockdown data were calculated to inform sample size calculations for future trials. The process evaluation adopted the RE-AIM framework to understand acceptability and feasibility of implementing the intervention. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with contact centre employees and managers, and activity preferences were collected using a questionnaire.RESULTS: A total of 11 contact centres participated: 155 employees from 6 centres in the pre-lockdown data collection, and 54 employees from 5 centres post-lockdown. Interviews and focus groups were conducted with 33 employees and managers, and 96 participants completed an intervention activity preference questionnaire. Overall, the intervention was perceived as acceptable and feasible to deliver. Most centres implemented several intervention activities aligned with SUH's theory of change and over 50% of staff participated in at least one activity (pre-lockdown period). Perceived benefits including reduced sedentary behaviour, increased physical activity, and improved staff morale and mood were reported by contact centre employees and managers.CONCLUSIONS: SUH demonstrates potential as an appealing and acceptable intervention, impacting several wellbeing outcomes.TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered on the ISRCTNdatabase: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN11580369.</p

A longitudinal and comparative content analysis of Instagram fitness posts

Body dissatisfaction is among the most common mental health challenges experienced by women and has been identified as a risk factor for disordered eating. Research has found that exposure to social media images depicting thin, muscular bodies, often dubbed ‘fitspiration’, may contribute to body dissatisfaction. Image-centred social media platforms, such as Instagram, have rising popularity among adolescents and young adults. However, little is known about the content of images produced by different fitness-related sources, such as those from fitness brands compared with individual users, and how fitness content on social media is evolving over time. This study sought to determine whether Instagram content varied between female fitness influencers and brands and how this content changed between 2019 and 2021. A longitudinal content analysis was conducted on a sample of 400 Instagram images using a coding scheme developed specifically for this project. The scheme coded images for fit ideal body depiction, fitness focus, objectification, and sexualisation. Chi-square tests indicated that female fitness influencer content was more sexualised and portrayed more of the fit ideal, while fitness brands produced more Instagram content with a fitness focus. There were no significant overall longitudinal changes for any of the four key variables. However, when looking at longitudinal changes by account type, fitness-focused influencer content increased while fitness-focused brand content decreased over time. These findings highlight discernible differences in content produced by different Instagram account types. It points future research towards the consideration of potential moderating factors, such as account type, when exploring the impact of social media images on body image and mental health

Public attitudes to, and perceived impacts of 20mph (32 km/h) speed limits in Edinburgh:An exploratory study using the Speed Limits Perceptions Survey (SLiPS)

The ‘Is 20 plenty for health?’ study is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research (PHR) grant 15/82/12.Between 2016 and 2018 a policy was implemented to increase the proportion of 20mph (32km/h) streets in Edinburgh, UK from approximately 50% to 80%, providing the opportunity to evaluate how behaviour and public perceptions change over time. This is important as negative public responses have been reported to limit the implementation of transport policies and may reduce the effectiveness of the policy. The Speed Limits Perception Survey (SLiPS) was developed to assess changes in public perceptions from baseline to 6 and 12 months post-implementation. We collected 3,485 individual responses to the survey, 64.6% (n = 2,253) of which included complete perceptions data. Using exploratory factor analysis, the following perception factors were identified: i) Detraction and resistance, ii) Support, iii) Rule following, iv) Child safety, and v) Walking safety. Following the 20mph implementation at 6–12 months: Support (ii) and Rule following (iii) had increased; Detraction and resistance (i) had decreased; and Child safety (iv) and Walking safety (v) had not changed significantly. These findings indicate that the public in Edinburgh became more positive towards the policy once it was implemented. However, more extensive policy or ongoing communication of the safety benefits of 20mph limits are needed to increase perceptions of safety that might lead to increased walking and cycling. Future research should aim to understand how those implementing speed limit interventions can positively influence public perceptions and how public perceptions about speed limits influence behaviour.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

"Are we working (too) comfortably?”:Understanding the nature of and factors associated with sedentary behaviour when working in the home environment

Home working has increased due to COVID-19, but little is known about how this change has impacted the health risk behaviour of elevated sedentary time. The aim of this cross-sectional exploratory study was to assess occupational sitting behaviour when working at home, and use the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model to identify influences on this behaviour. University staff (n = 267; 69% female; 92% white) who were predominantly working from home completed a questionnaire to assess sitting time, sitting breaks, demographic and occupational characteristics, and a 7-item COM-B questionnaire and open-ended questions to assess influences on time spent sitting whilst working from home. Data were analysed descriptively, a repeated measures ANOVA was used to determine differences in the COM-B items, and binary logistic regression was used to examine predictors of sitting time. Staff spent on average 89.5% (SD = 17.1) of their time sitting whilst working at home, and took an average of 1.36 (1.38) sitting breaks per hour. There were significant and meaningful differences in the influence of the COM factors on ability and willingness to reduce sitting behaviour (p < .0001; η(p)(2) = .38), and the open-ended responses added further context. The included variables accounted for 20.7% of variance in sitting behaviour, with age, sitting breaks, motivation-automatic, and opportunity-physical contributing significantly. Working from home leads to elevated levels of sitting, and the COM-B provides a useful model to identify key influences on ability and willingness to reduce sitting. Strategies incorporating regular breaks, habit formation/reversal, and restructuring the physical environment may be beneficial

Young people’s experiences of COVID-19 messaging at the start of the UK lockdown:Lessons for positive engagement and information sharing

BACKGROUND: To reduce COVID-19 infection rates during the initial stages of the pandemic, the UK Government mandated a strict period of restriction on freedom of movement or 'lockdown'. For young people, closure of schools and higher education institutions and social distancing rules may have been particularly challenging, coming at a critical time in their lives for social and emotional development. This study explored young people's experiences of the UK Government's initial response to the pandemic and related government messaging.METHODS: This qualitative study combines data from research groups at the University of Southampton, University of Edinburgh and University College London. Thirty-six online focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 150 young people (Southampton: n = 69; FGD = 7; Edinburgh: n = 41; FGD = 5; UCL: n = 40; FGD = 24). Thematic analysis was conducted to explore how young people viewed the government's response and messaging and to develop recommendations for how to best involve young people in addressing similar crises in the future. RESULTS: The abrupt onset of lockdown left young people shocked, confused and feeling ignored by government and media messaging. Despite this, they were motivated to adhere to government advice by the hope that life might soon return to normal. They felt a responsibility to help with the pandemic response, and wanted to be productive with their time, but saw few opportunities to volunteer.CONCLUSIONS: Young people want to be listened to and feel they have a part to play in responding to a national crisis such as the COVID-19 epidemic. To reduce the likelihood of disenfranchising the next generation, Government and the media should focus on developing messaging that reflects young people's values and concerns and to provide opportunities for young people to become involved in responses to future crises

Stakeholders’ experiences of the public health research process: time to change the system?

Background The importance of engaging stakeholders in the research process is well recognised. Whilst engagement is important, guidelines and practices vary for how stakeholders should be involved in research and how to facilitate effective collaborative relationships. Methods This study aimed to explore the perspectives and experiences of stakeholders involved in the policy and practice area of outdoor space and non-communicable disease prevention. Stakeholders interviewed included academics, practitioners, policy-makers, knowledge brokers and a funder. Results The findings suggest that stakeholders had positive experiences when engaged meaningfully in the research process, where research projects were carefully planned and managed with attention to context and culture, and where the research team was effective, respectful and communicative. These factors help to facilitate the translation of research into policy and practice. However, multiple challenges of collaborative research were identified which related to structural and systemic challenges, building and maintaining relationships, use and collection of data and information, cultural perceptions of research and research generation, and getting evidence into action. Participants felt that changing the funding system, exploring more collaborative research methodologies, improved research translation, and more effective collaborative relationships at all stages of the research process could address some of these challenges. Conclusions The findings highlight that, whilst stakeholder engagement in research was considered important, structural, cultural and individual practices impacted how this worked in practice. Identifying and testing solutions to address these challenges could improve synergies between research, policy, and practice and lead to the production of impactful research that reduces wastage of public funding, improves implementation of findings and ultimately improves public health outcomes