Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/24916
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Reducing sedentary time in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes: Process evaluation of the STAND (Sedentary Time and Diabetes) RCT
Authors: Biddle, Stuart J H
Edwardson, Charlotte L
Gorely, Trish
Wilmot, Emma G
Yates, Thomas
Nimmo, Myra A
Khunti, Kamlesh
Davies, Melanie J
Contact Email: trish.gorely@stir.ac.uk
Issue Date: 14-Jan-2017
Citation: Biddle SJH, Edwardson CL, Gorely T, Wilmot EG, Yates T, Nimmo MA, Khunti K & Davies MJ (2017) Reducing sedentary time in adults at risk of type 2 diabetes: Process evaluation of the STAND (Sedentary Time and Diabetes) RCT, BMC Public Health, 17 (1), Art. No.: 80.
Abstract: Background  Reducing sedentary behaviour may have important health implications. This study evaluated the potential enablers and barriers for outcomes of a randomised controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate a pragmatic education based intervention designed to reduce sedentary (sitting) behaviour in young adults at high risk of type 2 diabetes.  Methods  Data were collected from participants in the intervention group immediately after an educational workshop addressing sedentary time and diabetes risk (n = 71), through phone interviews 6 weeks (n = 45) after the workshop, and at the conclusion of the 12-month trial (n = 10). The two education session facilitators were also interviewed about the intervention.  Results  The RCT showed no difference in sedentary time at 12months between intervention and control arms. The lack of behaviour change appeared not to be attributed to the workshops, which were well led and very favourably received according to feedback. However, factors contributing to this lack of behaviour change include lack of perceived health risk from baseline measures feedback; the preference to adopt physically active behaviours rather than to sit less; certain barriers to sitting less; motivational drift after the 3-month follow-up measurements where participants had no contact for a further 9months; and, for some, unreliability of the self-monitoring tool.  Conclusions  The workshop was well led and well received by the attendees but future interventions need to consider more contact with participants, discuss any specific benefits around simply standing to reduce sitting time, address the barriers to sitting less, and provide a more user-friendly and reliable self-monitoring tool.  Trial registration  Current controlled trials ISRCTN08434554, MRC project 91409. Registered retrospectively on 22 February 2011.
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3941-9
Rights: © The Author(s). 2017 This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Biddle_etal_BMCPublicHealth_2016.pdf720.32 kBAdobe PDFView/Open



This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.