Logo image
Open Research University homepage
Surrey researchers Sign in
How to reduce sitting time? A review of behaviour change strategies used in sedentary behaviour reduction interventions among adults
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

How to reduce sitting time? A review of behaviour change strategies used in sedentary behaviour reduction interventions among adults

Benjamin Gardner, LJ Smith, F Lorencatto, M Hamer and Stuart J. H Biddle
Health Psychology Review, Vol.10(1), pp.89-112
02/01/2016
PMCID: PMC4743603
PMID: 26315814

Abstract

Psychology, Clinical Psychology Social Sciences
Sedentary behaviour - i.e., low energy-expending waking behaviour while seated or lying down - is a health risk factor, even when controlling for physical activity. This review sought to describe the behaviour change strategies used within interventions that have sought to reduce sedentary behaviour in adults. Studies were identified through existing literature reviews, a systematic database search, and hand-searches of eligible papers. Interventions were categorised as very promising', quite promising', or non-promising' according to observed behaviour changes. Intervention functions and behaviour change techniques were compared across promising and non-promising interventions. Twenty-six eligible studies reported thirty-eight interventions, of which twenty (53%) were worksite-based. Fifteen interventions (39%) were very promising, eight quite promising (21%), and fifteen non-promising (39%). Very or quite promising interventions tended to have targeted sedentary behaviour instead of physical activity. Interventions based on environmental restructuring, persuasion, or education were most promising. Self-monitoring, problem solving, and restructuring the social or physical environment were particularly promising behaviour change techniques. Future sedentary reduction interventions might most fruitfully incorporate environmental modification and self-regulatory skills training. The evidence base is, however, weakened by low-quality evaluation methods; more RCTs, employing no-treatment control groups, and collecting objective data are needed.
url
https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2015.1082146View
Published (Version of record)CC BY V4.0 Open

Metrics

Details

Logo image

Usage Policy