Health Promotion Journal of Australia Health Promotion Journal of Australia Society
Journal of the Australian Health Promotion Association
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Does a corporate worksite physical activity program reach those who are inactive? Findings from an evaluation of the Global Corporate Challenge

Rona Macniven A B , Lina Engelen A , Mia J. Kacen A and Adrian Bauman A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Sydney Medical School, Level 6 The Hub, Charles Perkins Centre (D17), University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.

B Corresponding author. Email: rona.macniven@sydney.edu.au

Health Promotion Journal of Australia 26(2) 142-145 https://doi.org/10.1071/HE14033
Submitted: 15 May 2014  Accepted: 18 January 2015   Published: 28 April 2015

Abstract

Issue addressed: Workplace physical activity programs can motivate inactive target groups to increase daily activity levels, but it is important to determine their reach and impact.

Methods: The Global Corporate Challenge (GCC) is a team-based program promoting pedometer-based self-monitoring to reach 10 000 steps per day. Participants (n = 587) from an Australian university were recruited and recorded their daily step counts. Demographic, anthropometric, behavioural, self-reported physical activity and sitting time data were collected at baseline and following the 16-week program.

Results: On average, participants self-estimated 11 638 daily steps in Week 1, increasing to measured estimates of 13 787 daily steps in Week 16 (P < 0.001). At baseline, 92% of survey completers were already meeting the physical activity recommendations, increasing to 98% (P = 0.059) at follow-up. Four month improvements in objectively assessed anthropometric measures showed small, non-significant reductions in weight (–0.12 kg; P = 0.416), body mass index (–0.06 kg/m2; P = 0.314) and waist circumference (–0.43 cm; P = 0.082). Sitting time during work decreased significantly by 21 min per day (P < 0.001) and participants with initially low levels of sitting time at work were more likely to increase their step counts during the GCC (adjusted odds ratio 1.90, 95% confidence interval 1.03–3.50).

Conclusions: Although this pedometer-based program resulted in increases in physical activity and reductions in occupational sedentary behaviour, most participants were already meeting physical activity recommendations at baseline.

So what?: Workplace interventions need to be better targeted to reach inactive employees to have population-level impacts on chronic disease risk factors.


References

[1]  World Health Organization (WHO). Preventing chronic diseases: a vital investment. Geneva: WHO; 2009.

[2]  Freak-Poli RL, Cumpston M, Peeters A, Clemes SA (2013) Workplace pedometer interventions for increasing physical activity. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 4, CD009209

[3]  Bravata DM, Smith-Spangler C, Sundaram V, Gienger AL, Lin N, Lewis R, et al (2007) Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: A systematic review. JAMA 298, 2296–304.
Using pedometers to increase physical activity and improve health: A systematic review.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXhtlGntLvI&md5=47673a3300a7ca3cc8a2bad997865c9eCAS | 18029834PubMed |

[4]  Challenge GC. Global Corporate Challenge. 2013 Available from: https://www.gettheworldmoving.com/ [verified 18 October 2013].

[5]  Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. National physical activity guidelines for adults. Canberra: Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing; 2005.

[6]  Freak-Poli R, Wolfe R, Backholer K, de Courten M, Peeters A (2011) Impact of a pedometer-based workplace health program on cardiovascular and diabetes risk profile. Prev Med 53, 162–71.
Impact of a pedometer-based workplace health program on cardiovascular and diabetes risk profile.CrossRef | 21762721PubMed |

[7]  Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30, 473–83.
The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.CrossRef | 1593914PubMed |

[8]  Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The Active Australia survey: a guide and manual for implementation, analysis and reporting. Canberra: AIHW; 2004.

[9]  Brown WJ, Burton NW, Marshall AL, Miller YD (2008) Reliability and validity of a modified self-administered version of the Active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women. Aust N Z J Public Health 32, 535–41.
Reliability and validity of a modified self-administered version of the Active Australia physical activity survey in a sample of mid-age women.CrossRef | 19076744PubMed |

[10]  Centre for Epidemiology and Research. 2010 Report on adult health from the New South Wales population health survey. Sydney: NSW Department of Health; 2011.

[11]  Chau JY, van der Ploeg HP, Dunn S, Kurko J, Bauman AE (2011) A tool for measuring workers’ sitting time by domain: the Workforce Sitting Questionnaire. Br J Sports Med 45, 1216–22.
A tool for measuring workers’ sitting time by domain: the Workforce Sitting Questionnaire.CrossRef | 21947817PubMed |

[12]  Stamatakis E, Chau JY, Pedisic Z, Bauman A, Macniven R, Coombs N, et al (2013) Are sitting occupations associated with increased all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality risk? A pooled analysis of seven British population cohorts. PLoS ONE 8, e73753
Are sitting occupations associated with increased all-cause, cancer, and cardiovascular disease mortality risk? A pooled analysis of seven British population cohorts.CrossRef | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhsFOnt7nK&md5=af318d1d9eeecdaba33f8f890e44ab84CAS | 24086292PubMed |

[13]  Powell KE, Paluch AE, Blair SN (2011) Physical activity for health: What kind? How much? How intense? On top of what? Annu Rev Public Health 32, 349–65.
Physical activity for health: What kind? How much? How intense? On top of what?CrossRef | 21128761PubMed |

[14]  Rissel C, Mulley C, Ding D (2013) Travel mode and physical activity at Sydney University. Int J Environ Res Public Health 10, 3563–77.
Travel mode and physical activity at Sydney University.CrossRef | 23939390PubMed |

[15]  Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, et al (2003) International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35, 1381–95.
International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity.CrossRef | 12900694PubMed |

[16]  Brown W, Bauman A, Chey T, Trost S, Mummery K (2004) Method: comparison of surveys used to measure physical activity. Aust N Z J Public Health 28, 128–34.
Method: comparison of surveys used to measure physical activity.CrossRef | 15233351PubMed |

[17]  Niessen MA, Laan LE, Robroek JWS, Essink-Bot M-L, Peek N, Kraaijenhagen AR, et al (2013) Determinants of participation in a web-based health risk assessment and consequences for health promotion programs. J Med Internet Res 15, e151
Determinants of participation in a web-based health risk assessment and consequences for health promotion programs.CrossRef | 23933650PubMed |

[18]  Gucciardi E, Cameron JI, Liao CD, Palmer A, Stewart DE (2007) Program design features that can improve participation in health education interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol 7, 47
Program design features that can improve participation in health education interventions.CrossRef | 17996089PubMed |

[19]  Baranowski T, Cerin E, Baranowski J (2009) Steps in the design, development and formative evaluation of obesity prevention-related behavior change trials. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 6, 6
Steps in the design, development and formative evaluation of obesity prevention-related behavior change trials.CrossRef | 19159476PubMed |

[20]  St George A, King L, Newson R, Wells V, Campbell M (2012) Implementing workplace health promotion initiatives: who should we target? Health Promot J Austr 23, 134–40.



Export Citation Cited By (6)

View Altmetrics