PubMed · 10239912
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
G Lundskow. 1979. Hospital elevator systems.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10239912/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: Stair climbing is a lifestyle physical activity that uses more calories per minute than jogging. This study tested an intervention designed to promote stair climbing in a workplace. Because previous studies provide only equivocal evidence of the effects of increased stair climbing in worksites, a formal comparison of the effects of the intervention on stair ascent and descent was made. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: In a five-story public sector building, a 2-week baseline was followed by 6 weeks of an intervention involving a 23(1/2)- x 16(1/2)-inch poster in the lobby, the same poster and six messages affixed to the stair risers between floors, and an 11(3/4)- x 8(1/4)-inch point-of-choice prompt at the elevators. Stair and elevator choices (n = 26,806) were videotaped throughout and subsequently coded for direction of travel, traveler's sex, and traveler's load. Weight status was coded using silhouettes beside the computer monitor. RESULTS: A significant effect of the intervention on stair climbing was greater in those coded as overweight (+5.4%; odds ratio = 1.33) than in individuals of normal weight (+2.5%; odds ratio = 1.12). Although stair descent was more common than ascent, the intervention had similar effects for both directions of travel. DISCUSSION: Stair climbing at work has few barriers and seems to be a type of physical activity that is acceptable to overweight individuals. The relatively weak effect of workplace interventions compared with results for public access staircases may reflect uncontrolled effects such as the immediate availability of the elevator for the traveler.
The US government initiated a national health campaign targeting 100 'small step' lifestyle changes to combat obesity. Small Step #67 advocates stair instead of escalator usage in public settings. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of motivational signs prompting stair use over escalator use on pedestrians' stair usage in commuter settings. Eight studies, testing the effects of motivational prompts on stair vs. escalator usage in public settings, were reviewed. Participant and study attributes were descriptively coded. Effect size was calculated as the change in percent units of stair users during the intervention phases vs. the baseline phase. The average study included approximately 45,000 observations that were recorded across an average of 15 weeks of intervention. The mean +/- SD change in percent units of stair users was 2.8% +/- 2.4% (P < 0.001), and effects were twice as large in females (4.8%) as in males (2.4%). The number of stairs/building, baseline stair use, and total intervention weeks predicted change in stair use, although the effects were clinically miniscule. In a hypothetical city intervention, we projected that a 2.8% increase in stair usage would result in a weight loss and/or weight gain prevention of 300 g/person/year among new stair users. In sum, point-of-decision motivational signs may help communities attain Small Step #67. However, the singular impact of this community intervention on correcting energy imbalance may be minimal, having slight impact itself on reducing the national obesity prevalence.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether signs encouraging taking the stairs or discouraging taking the elevator lead to an increasing number of patients taking the stairs instead of the elevator in a hospital. DESIGN: Interventional study. METHOD: During a period of 6 weeks in the period October-December 2004, an investigator recorded how many patients took the stairs and how many took the elevator on the first floor of a hospital close to a diabetes outpatient clinic. A baseline measurement was done over a period of 2 weeks and 4 weeks were used for evaluating the effect of 2 different interventions, each lasting 2 weeks. During the first intervention, a sign was hung up near the elevator, which read: 'Exercise is healthy, take the stairs'. During the second intervention the sign read: 'Use of this elevator is exclusively for personnel and persons with restricted mobility'. Staff members and disabled patients were excluded from the study. RESULTS: A total of 2674 movements were counted. Use of the stairs increased statistically significantly during both interventions: from 54.6% to 63.4% during the first intervention and to 70.4% during the second intervention. CONCLUSION: Signs in a diabetes outpatient clinic that either encouraged the use of the stairs or discouraged the use of the elevator increased the patients' use of the stairs.