Pattern of attention, stress, anxiety, and musculoskeletal discomfort levels when using a sit-stand desk in a college class

• Published in: Journal of Physical Education and Sport 2020-07, Vol.20, p.2118-2125
• Main Authors: Frost, Jeremy M, Douglas, Marty, Terbizan, Donna J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Academic Achievement; Anxiety; Body Composition; Call centers; Classrooms; College Students; Control Groups; Data collection; Educational Facilities Improvement; Elementary Education; Elementary Schools; Employees; Fatigue (Biology); Fitness equipment; Grade 2; Grade 4; Intervention; Investigations; Learner Engagement; Observation; Pain; Productivity; Secondary Schools; Stress; Students; Work stations; Workstations
• ISSN: 2247-8051; 2247-806X
• DOI: 10.7752/jpes.2020.s3285

Problem Statement: Increased amount of daily sitting time has been linked to increased risk of disease, independent of the amount of daily physical activity. A number of devices have been developed to address prolonged sitting in work and educational settings (e.g., sit-stand desks, treadmill-desks, cycle-desks, stepping desks). However, very little research has investigated the effect of a sit-stand desk on cognitive mood and performance in the college classroom. Purpose: To determine the effect of using adjustable-height (sit-stand) desks in a college class on attention (AT), stress (ST), musculoskeletal discomfort (MD), anxiety (AN), and academic performance (EXAM). Approach: A total of 18 subjects completed the 13 week intervention (week 3-15 of the semester). The standing group participants (S) used a sit-stand desk, placed in the back and one side of the classroom, to use as they desired; the control group (C) used standard desks. Participants completed a weekly visual analogue scale (VAS) for AT, ST, MD, and AN, and were given space to provide optional comments on why they answered the way they did. Class sessions were video recorded to allow for direct observation of attention (OAT). Results: The main findings indicated a significant interaction effect for AT (F[12, 166] = 2.79, p = 0.002) and ST (F[12, 166] = 2.15, p = 0.017), and significantly (p=0.002) lower overall MD for the intervention (12.81±3.45) vs. control (35.12±4.80). EXAM and OAT were not different between groups. Conclusion: A strength of this study is the week to week data collection on overall discomfort level and various measures of cognitive mood and performance. Use of a sit-stand desk was associated with lower MD scores and high variability in AT and ST scores from week to week.