Process Evaluation of a Multi-Component “Sit Less, Walk More” Workplace Intervention for Office Workers

Abstract

Sit Less, Walk More (SLWM) workplace intervention was designed for office workers with demonstrated efficacy in improving walking and some cardiometabolic biomarkers. However, little is known about the participants’ perceptions of the program and each program component’s contribution to observed program effects. PURPOSE: To evaluate participants’ perceptions of and engagement with the program components in the SLWM to understand program effects. METHOD: Process evaluation data were collected during and immediately after the 12-week intervention period. The SLWM included multi-components: three monthly newsletters, six biweekly motivational tools, a team-based 10,000 steps challenge, environmental prompts, and walking routes and resources. A survey contained both closed and open-ended questions assessing frequency of use and perceptions of program components; factors that hindered the use of program components; and recommendations for improving program components. Qualitative data were analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-one (100%) intervention participants completed the post-intervention survey. Their ages ranged from 30 to 62 (mean = 52.1, SD = 6.57). The majority of participants were married (92.2%) and highly educated (60.8% had a college or graduate degree). Most participants were satisfied with the SLWM program (84.3%) and thought the program to be beneficial (78.4%) and effective (74.5%) to them in increasing physical activity and decreasing sitting behavior. Participants reported the 10,000 steps challenge to be the most helpful component because of the motivation and encouragement elicited by the pedometer and Step Log (79.6%), goal setting (45.5%), and the use of the support group approach as well as rewards and recognition for group competition (29.6%). The walking route was not received well by the participants. The reasons for this included time constraints due to work or family obligations (54.1%), physical environment issues primarily due to weather (21.6%), and using their own preferred methods of exercise or walking routes (13.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings provide a better understanding of the use and preference for different program components and how future SLWM workplace intervention for office workers could be provided. Supported by MOST Grant.