Effects of Active Workstation Use on Walking Mechanics and Work Efficiency
Janet S Dufek*, John R Harry, Michael Soucy, Mark Guadagnoli and Monica AF Lounsbery
Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, USA
- *Corresponding Author:
- Janet S Dufek
Department of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences
University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 4505 South Maryland Parkway
Mailstop 3034, Las Vegas, NV 89154-3034, USA
E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: April 01, 2016; Accepted date: April 25, 2016; Published date: April 29, 2016
Citation: Dufek JS, Harry JR, Soucy M, Guadagnoli M, Lounsbery MAF (2016) Effects of Active Workstation Use on Walking Mechanics and Work Efficiency. J Nov Physiother 6:289. doi:10.4172/2165-7025.1000289
Copyright: © 2016 Dufek JS, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Recently, the amount of time dedicated to sedentary work-related tasks has increased. Further, this trend toward decreased physical activity in the workplace is expected to increase. Active workstations such as treadmill desks provide health benefits; however, concerns for the ability to walk safely and work efficiency remain unclear. The purposes of this investigation were to: 1) compare kinematics of treadmill walking (TW) with kinematics of walking while performing computer mousing tasks (WC) using a treadmill desk, and 2) examine work efficiency in terms of the time to complete computer mousing tasks during WC compared to standing (SC). Trunk and lower-extremity kinematic data were obtained from 9 males (23.4 ± 4.2 yrs; 81.7 ± 16.4 kg; 176.3 ± 5.5 cm) and 7 females (23.0 ± 3.3 yrs; 58.4 ± 6.5 kg; 171.7 ± 9.0 cm) using a 10-camera motion capture system. Kinematic data were normalized to the gait cycle and were divided into sub-phases for analysis. Kinematic data of the first and last 10 WC strides were compared to identify shortterm kinematic adaptations (α=0.05). Neither computer task performance (p=0.071) nor walking velocity (p=0.089) was sacrificed during WC compared to SC and TW, respectively. Significant kinematic changes occurred in response to WC (p<0.05). Significant differences were identified between the first and last 10 WC strides (p<0.05), which revealed that some participants trended toward a return to normal gait as exposure to WC increased. Results suggest that active workstations do not diminish computing performance, and that walking safety is not sacrificed after initial exposure. We suggest gradual introduction to an active workstation, particularly if the computer task is challenging.