These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Energy Expenditure of Standing Compared to Sitting While Conducting Office Tasks.
    Author: Burns J, Forde C, Dockrell S.
    Journal: Hum Factors; 2017 Nov; 59(7):1078-1087. PubMed ID: 28719766.
    Abstract:
    Objectives This study aimed to investigate the energy expenditure of common office-based tasks. The objectives were to: (a) test the classification of tasks as sedentary or light-intensity physical activity and (b) compare the energy expenditure of tasks under two postural conditions (sitting and standing). Background The sedentary nature of office work has been highlighted as a health risk, and strategies to reduce sedentary behavior at work have been developed. However, there is limited evidence to guide the utilization of sit-stand workstations in the workplace for metabolic health benefits. Method A repeated measures laboratory-based study compared the energy expenditure of common office tasks in sitting and standing using indirect calorimetry ( n = 22). Four standardized tasks (sitting/standing quietly, reading, typing, sorting paper) under two postural conditions (sitting, standing) were performed in a randomized order. Results The mean energy expenditure for all tasks in sitting and standing was <1.5 METs. There were no significant differences in the energy expenditure of doing the same task in sitting compared to standing. In a repeated measures ANOVA, task ( p < .001) had a greater influence on METs expended than posture ( p = .030). Conclusion The study confirmed that the difference in energy expenditure of tasks carried out in sitting compared to standing is negligible. Application The ubiquitous use and utility of sit-stand workstations in the workplace needs to be reviewed. Notwithstanding the potential benefits of movement that may occur naturally, this study confirmed that standing as opposed to sitting does not produce a clinically important increase in energy expenditure.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]