0
0
In recent years, concerns about the health risks associated with sedentary lifestyles have grown, leading to a surge in alternative workstation designs aimed at improving worker well-being. While it’s an exaggeration to equate “sitting” with “smoking,” research indicates that prolonged sitting can contribute to health issues such as hypertension, musculoskeletal discomfort, and daytime exhaustion. A new study sheds light on how different types of workstations—stand-biased, sit-stand, and traditional—affect workers’ health and productivity.
The study, conducted by a team from Texas A&M University’s School of Public Health and published in IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, explored the relationship between workstation types and worker outcomes. The research was led by Tricia Lynn Salzar, DrPH, Kaysey Aguilar, PhD, Matthew Lee Smith, PhD, Adam Pickens, PhD, Gang Han, PhD, Mark Edward Benden, PhD, and doctoral student Grace Anderson.
Over a period of 10 days, the researchers monitored the computer usage and activity levels of 61 office workers, who were divided into three groups based on their workstation type: stand-biased, sit-stand, and traditional. The traditional workstation group served as the control group, while the stand-biased workstations featured fixed work surfaces at standing elbow height, and sit-stand workstations included fully adjustable surfaces.
Participants’ usage of office equipment, including footrests and keyboard trays, was recorded, along with their reported discomfort in various body areas such as the neck, back, and wrists. Productivity was assessed through hidden data-logging software, and physical activity was measured using an activity sensor.
The findings revealed several key insights:
- Productivity and Computer Use: There was no significant difference in the number of keyclicks among the three groups. However, the stand-biased group exhibited a higher word count and more errors compared to the traditional group.
- Physical Activity: The stand-biased group stood significantly more and sat less than the traditional group. They also had fewer transitions per hour, indicating more sustained standing periods.
- Discomfort Levels: Discomfort was reported by 65% of all participants, with the traditional workstation group experiencing higher rates of lower back discomfort (80%) compared to 51.7% in the stand-biased group.
Despite these differences, the overall outcomes between workstation types were not statistically significant in terms of discomfort or productivity, though the stand-biased group demonstrated greater energy expenditure and less sitting time.
Kaysey Aguilar, one of the study’s lead researchers, emphasized that “the risk of health issues from sedentary work can be alleviated through alternative desk options, like sit-stand or stand-biased workstations. These are win-win solutions because they benefit workers’ health while maintaining the high productivity employers expect.”
As the debate continues on the most effective workstation design for promoting health and productivity, this study offers valuable evidence supporting the benefits of alternative desk options. Employers and employees alike may find that incorporating such workstations can lead to healthier and more productive work environments.
