A RE-AIM evaluation in early adopters to iteratively improve the online BeUpstanding™ program supporting workers to sit less and move more

Table 5 Program effectiveness on workplace sitting and physical activity in evaluation group ^a

Model	Mean difference (95% CI)	p
Evaluable cases
*Unadjusted (n = 337 pre, 167 post)*
% Sitting	−9.0 (−12.0, −5.9)	< 0.001
% Standing	6.8 (4.2, 9.3)	< 0.001
% Moving	2.1 (0.6, 3.7)	0.007
*Adjusted for age & sex (n = 334 pre, 167 post)*
% Sitting	−9.1 (−12.2, −6.1)	< 0.001
% Standing	6.8 (4.3, 9.3)	< 0.001
% Moving	2.2 (0.7, 3.8)	0.005
*Adjusted (n = 334 pre, 167 post)* ^b
% Sitting	−9.2 (−12.3, −6.2)	< 0.001
% Standing	6.7 (4.2, 9.3)	< 0.001
% Moving	2.3 (0.8, 3.9)	0.003
Complete cases
*Unadjusted (n = 73 pre, 73 post)*
% Sitting	−9.2 (−13.1, −5.3)	< 0.001
% Standing	6.7 (3.5, 10.0)	< 0.001
% Moving	2.4 (0.4, 4.5)	0.017

Table reports mean difference (post vs pre-program) from linear mixed models, with random intercepts for cluster (organisational teams) and staff, unstructured covariance
^a Includes all organisational teams (teams from same organisation combined) with activity data collected in ≥1 pre- and ≥ 1 post- program staff survey: 7 organisational teams with 18 champions
^b Adjusted for age (years), sex (female yes/no), education (university yes/no) and employment (full time / part time / casual)

ISSN: 1471-2458