Does active sitting provide more physiological changes than traditional sitting and standing workstations?

Area of Science:

• Ergonomics and Human Factors
• Occupational Health and Safety
• Physiology

Background:

• Traditional office chairs offer limited physical activity, potentially contributing to sedentary behavior.
• Active chairs aim to increase physical engagement during seated work.
• Understanding the physiological impact and user perception of active chairs is crucial for workplace design.

Purpose of the Study:

• To compare the physiological effects of two active chairs against a traditional office chair and a standing workstation.
• To assess muscle oxygenation, heart rate, and electrodermal activity during use.
• To evaluate user perception of productivity across different workstations.

Main Methods:

• Cross-sectional study involving 24 healthy participants.
• Workstation conditions included two active chairs (AC1, AC2), a traditional office chair, and a standing workstation.
• Physiological measures: near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS), electrodermal activity (EDA), and heart rate (HR).
• Participants engaged in a 60-minute active protocol involving alternating motions.

Main Results:

• Both active chairs significantly increased oxygenated blood in the gastrocnemius muscle.
• Heart rate and electrodermal activity (stress levels) showed slight variations with task and time.
• Participants reported feeling more productive using the traditional office chair compared to the active chairs.

Conclusions:

• Active chairs can enhance physiological responses, such as muscle oxygenation.
• Despite physiological changes, active chairs may not align with user perceptions of productivity.
• Further research is needed to optimize active chair design for both physiological benefits and user experience.