IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0293602.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Divya Sivaramakrishnan
  • Graham Baker
  • Richard A Parker
  • Jillian Manner
  • Scott Lloyd
  • Ruth Jepson

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Divya Sivaramakrishnan & Graham Baker & Richard A Parker & Jillian Manner & Scott Lloyd & Ruth Jepson, 2023. "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," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(12), pages 1-32, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293602
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293602
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293602
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0293602&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0293602?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0293602. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.