J.T. Santos Cerqueira1,2, M.L. Caíres Comper3,1, A. Martins Silva1,4, R. Simprini Padula1
1Universidade Cidade de São Paulo, Masters and Doctoral Programs in Physical Therapy, São Paulo - SP, Brazil, 2Faculdade Santo Agostinho - AFYA, Medicine, Itabuna - Bahia, Brazil, 3Universidade Federal do Sul da Bahia, Interdisciplinary Health Sciences, Itabuna - Bahia, Brazil, 4Centro Universitário do Vale do Ribeira, Physical Therapy, Registro - São Paulo, Brazil
Background: Technological advances have changed the job demands, reducing physical exertion, consequently, energy expenditure. The increase of physical inactivity and sedentary behavior partially due to new forms of employment and occupational tasks contribute with the high prevalence of chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs). For this to happen, it is of fundamental importance to develop appropriate tools to assess sedentary behavior in a broad, accessible, low-cost, with good measurement properties such as scales, questionnaires, and diaries.
Purpose: This study aimed to identify questionnaires that assess sedentary behavior in workers and the quality of their measurement properties.
Methods: The research protocol was registered at PROSPERO (Registration-CRD42018085553). A search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus databases using search terms about workplace, work site, workers with sedentary behavior, sitting, sedentary time combined through the AND/OR and NOT. There was no language restriction, or year of publication, and articles were included in peer-reviewed journal. The screening process used was the first reading of titles and abstracts. The incorporated studies were revised full text, again by two independent evaluators (JTSC and MLCC) and in case of disagreement a third evaluator was consulted (RSP). The questionnaires found were items analyzed to identity the criterial used to evaluate sedentary behavior in workers. The measurement properties tested were evaluated using the COSMIN checklist. In addiction other general information such as characteristics of the study population, general characteristics of the questionnaire, specific characteristics of sedentary behavior also were extracted from the studies.
Results: 4,187 studies were found in databases. The questionnaires located by the inclusion criteria were: Workforce Sitting Questionnaire (WSQ), Occupational Sitting and Physical Activity Questionnaire (OSPAQ), Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ), Single-Item Question for Assessment of Stationary Behavior (SED-GIH), Stand&Move@Work Sedentary Behavior Questionnaire (SBQ) and Self-reported breaks in workplace sitting time. The questionnaires assess different domains of sedentary behavior, but none in their entirety. There was also a difference in the domain (Work / Leisure / Commuting), distinction of days (week / weekend) and duration (hours / min /% time per day) in sedentary behavior. Four of the six studies evaluated were office workers, but did not classify occupational tasks performed.
The most tested measurement properties were test-retest reliability and responsiveness, followed by construct and criterion validity. The COSMIN checklist showed that due to the general classification of the questionnaires, there is evidence of low quality of the items evaluated, with a moderate to high risk of bias.
The most tested measurement properties were test-retest reliability and responsiveness, followed by construct and criterion validity. The COSMIN checklist showed that due to the general classification of the questionnaires, there is evidence of low quality of the items evaluated, with a moderate to high risk of bias.
Conclusion(s): Questionnaires that assess sedentary behavior in workers have unsatisfactory measurement properties tests. The questionnaires identified were applied to office workers, and it does not detail the occupational activities performed. such as in what condition he remained standing, for what type of work performed. Our findings indicate that there is opportunity in this field of research.
Implications: Sedentary behavior questionnaires must be reliable and valid in order to identify sedentary occupational tasks, the time spent on each one. As well as contributing to assess the outcome of interventions to reduce sedentary lifestyle and improve workers' health.
Funding, acknowledgements: Financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brazil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001
Keywords: Sedentary behavior, Occupational health, Public health
Topic: Occupational health & ergonomics
Did this work require ethics approval? No
Institution: Universidade Cidade de São Paulo - SP
Committee: Universidade Cidade de São Paulo - SP
Reason: Systematic review
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
