Rev Bras Fisiol Exerc 2021;20(4):461-69

doi: 10.33233/rbfex.v20i4.4826

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Barriers perceived by workers in the administrative area to participate in an occupational gymnastics program

Barreiras percebidas por trabalhadores da área administrativa para participar de um programa de ginástica laboral

Valquíria Aparecida de Lima¹, Janaina Resende Medeiros², Marcos Gonçalves Maciel³, Sérgio Roberto de Lucca¹

¹Faculdade de Ciências Médicas (FCM), UNICAMP, Campinas SP, Brazil

²Associação Brasileira de Ginástica Laboral, Guarulhos, SP, Brazil

³Universidade do Estado de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil

Received: June 27, 2021; Accepted: Aug 17, 2021.

Correspondence: Valquíria Aparecida de Lima, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas (FCM), UNICAMP, Rua Vital Brasil, 100 Prédio CIPOI 2º piso 13083-888 Campinas SP

Valquíria Aparecida de Lima: valquiria@abgl.org.br

Janaina Resende Medeiros: abgl@abgl.org.br

Marcos Gonçalves Maciel: marcos.maciel@uemg.br

Sérgio Roberto de Lucca: slucca@fcm.unicamp.br

Abstract

Aim: To analyze the barriers presented by office workers from an administrative sector of a chemical company at the city of São Paulo to not participate in labor gymnastics (GL). Methods: Descriptive, cross-sectional, exploratory research. Sample: 176 participants, 98 (55.7%) men and 78 (44.3%) women, average ages 35 and 29 respectively. Non-probabilistic and intentional selection of participants and the company. In the data analysis, descriptive statistics and the chi-square test were adopted (with p < 0.05). Results: 44 participants answered not to participate in the program (12 men and 32 women); the main barriers pointed out by the participants were: “lack of time” (28.4%), “overwork” (19.8%), “miscellaneous commitments” (16.9%), “already practicing physical activity” (14.8%). Conclusion: The organizational factors of work present important barriers that can influence adherence to participation in GL. It is recommended to expand the analysis of organizational factors and the perceptions of workers from all sectors involved, to adapt GL to the peculiarities of the organization.

Keywords: exercise; gymnastics; sedentary behavior; occupational health.

Resumo

Objetivo: Analisar as barreiras apresentadas por trabalhadores do setor administrativo de uma empresa do ramo químico na cidade de São Paulo para não participar da ginástica laboral (GL). Métodos: Pesquisa do tipo descritiva, transversal, exploratória. Amostra: 176 participantes, sendo 98 (55,7%) homens e 78 (44,3%) mulheres, com média de idade 35 e 29 respectivamente. Seleção não probabilística e intencional dos participantes e da empresa. Na análise dos dados adotou-se a estatística descritiva e o teste de qui-quadrado (p < 0,05). Resultados: 44 participantes responderam não participar do programa (12 homens e 32 mulheres); as principais barreiras apontadas pelos participantes foram: “falta de tempo” (28,4%), “excesso de trabalho” (19,8%), “compromissos diversos” (16,9%), “já pratica atividade física” (14,8%). Conclusão: Os fatores organizacionais do trabalho apresentam importantes barreiras que podem influenciar na adesão à participação na GL. Recomenda-se ampliar a análise dos fatores organizacionais e das percepções dos(as) trabalhadores(as) de todos os setores envolvidos, para adequar a GL às peculiaridades da organização onde é desenvolvida.

Palavras-chave: exercício físico; ginástica; comportamento sedentário; saúde do trabalhador.

Introduction

One of the most significant public health problems globally, considered a pandemic, is the physical inactivity [1,2,3]. This fact is increasing the prevalence of chronic diseases [4,5] as well as the social costs related to health and premature deaths resulting from these diseases [6,7]. In this scenario, actions to promote physical activities stimulation are recommended to be performed in different environments, including at work [8].

The physical activity practice in the workplace can be performed through labor gymnastics (LG) [5]. This activity is understood as the performance of specific physical exercises and adapted to the different functions and working conditions [9,10]. LG has numerous benefits both for companies [11,12] and for the workers [13,14]. However, as in different social contexts, adherence to the physical activity practice in the work environment, specifically concerning LG, presents some barriers to adherence.

Understanding the factors that interfere with the adherence or not to this activity must permeate a multifactorial and multidimensional view, regardless of the social context. Thus, some studies in the international literature were carried out to identify these aspects [15,16,17,18,19,20]. However, in the Brazilian scenario, there are few investigations found on this topic [18]. In this sense, it is necessary to carry out studies on the national scene that can contribute to the adhesion and production of knowledge for the area regarding this theme to dialogue with international knowledge.

In this sense, this work seeks to understand the barriers presented by workers to not participate in labor gymnastics. When considering this issue, the objective of this research was to analyze the barriers presented by workers in the administrative sector of a company in the chemical sector, in the metropolitan region of São Paulo, to not participate in labor gymnastics.

Methods

Type of study

This research was carried out in 2017, whose study design is characterized as qualitative, exploratory, and transversal [21].

Sample characteristic

As an inclusion criterion for participation in the research, participants should be 18 years old or older and active in that company during data collection.

This research is part of a data clipping, specifically concerning barriers to the practice of LG, collected, and analyzed from a broader study, whose total sample was 176 people. In this sense, the sample of this study was composed of 44 workers, all from the administrative sector, who answered that they would not participate in the LG classes, and who reported the reasons interpreted as barriers. The sociodemographic profile of the participants is described in Table I.

Table I - Sociodemographic profile of the sample

Source: Research data.

Place of study

The choice of the sample was intentional and for convenience. The investigated company is in the chemical sector, located in the city of São Paulo, has 550 workers, of which 250 are in production and 300 in the administrative sector.

The company has maintained the LG program for 16 years. The production sector is divided into two shifts, with five LG classes per week, at the beginning of the day, namely, 6:00 am and 2:00 pm, respectively. In turn, the administrative sector holds five weekly LG classes, in the morning, between 8:30 am and 10:30 am. The professional responsible for conducting the classes conducts them in the different sections of this sector during this period. Both sectors have LG classes lasting 10 minutes, being taught by Physical Education professionals.

Data collection instrument

As a data collection instrument, a semi-structured questionnaire was adopted, validated by Lima [22], and composed of sociodemographic data, information regarding participation in LG classes (weekly frequency and general time of participation), and justifications for non-participation, called barriers. The first author of this work delivered this questionnaire to all eligible members of LG at their respective workstations, who responded and returned it to the applicator.

Data analysis

Regarding data analysis, it was verified through the Shapiro-Wilk test that there was no results normality. Furthermore, when considering the difference between the number of men (12) and women (32) participating in the research, it was decided to carry out the weighted average of the gender variable in proportions adjusted for both sexes. Such adjustment was necessary to establish a balance in the intersections and avoid distorting the analysis, considering the higher number of female respondents, as well as the reduced number of participants in the present study.

Descriptive statistical tools with mean and standard deviation measures were considered, as well as the Chi-square test to assess the correlation of barriers to the practice of LG between the independent variable - gender - with the other variables: already practicing physical activity; inappropriate hours; excess of work; religious origin; lack of support from the management; lack of interest; ashamed of exposing myself; several commitments. For all analyses, the significance level adopted was the value of p < 0.05.

It is worth noting that, during the investigation, the ethical aspects recommended in resolutions 466/12 and 510/16 of the Ministry of Health, which guide research with human beings, were considered. Thus, the research was submitted and approved by the Ethics Committee of the university to which one of the authors was affiliated (CAAE: 53093816.0.0000.5404).

All participants were duly informed about the purposes of the investigation and signed the Free and Informed Consent Form (FICF) so that their identities were kept confidential. In addition, those responsible for the company consented to the survey being carried out on-site, as indicated in the Letter of Agreement.

Results

For the general evaluation of the data, the SPSS 19.0 Software was used. Figure 1 demonstrates the results regarding the barriers identified for the practice of LG.

Source: authors.

Figure 1 - Description of barriers to non-participation in LG activities in a company in the city of São Paulo, 2017

Table II presents the data according to the analysis of the gender variable, relating it to the data obtained from the answers regarding the barriers to LG, using the Chi-square test. The results demonstrate that there is no significance between the variables in question. However, the descriptive statistics of the variables infers the need for stimuli for the practice of physical activity among the identified barriers.

Table II - Correlation between gender and barriers to the practice of LG, in a company in the city of São Paulo, 2017

Source: authors.

Discussion

In general, the results identified in this study present organizational aspects such as “lack of time” (28.4%), “excess of work” (19.8%), and “several commitments” as the main barriers to participation in gymnastics classes at work (16.9%), as well as the personal perception of having a physically active lifestyle in their free time, “already practicing physical activity” (14.8%), such claim is not justifiable by the fact that LG has goals distinct.

It was identified among the study participants the predominance of women with higher education and single. These data are consistent with those made available by the Surveillance System for Risk Factors for non-communicable chronic diseases (VIGITEL) regarding the practice of physical activity [23]. This report presents data regarding the physical activity practice in free time from a population sample, although it does not discriminate specific population groups.

VIGITEL [23] shows a frequency of 13.9% of physically inactive adults in 2019. According to this report, the frequency of physically inactive men tended to increase with age, while among women, it decreased until 54 years old and increased from that age onwards. Physical inactivity reached the highest frequency in the less educated stratum. Thus, the profile of physically inactive people in the sample of the present investigation differs from that of VIGITEL [23] concerning age group among women and education level. This fact demonstrates the complexity involved in the issue of adherence to physical activity, with emphasis on behavioral, cultural, environmental, and social aspects, including work.

A study carried out by Grande & Silva [18] analyzed the reasons presented by 151 participating workers (45.11 ± 10.22 years) and 183 workers (43.61 ± 9.38) not participating in the LG. Most non-participants were male 97 (53%). In turn, this same group represented 41.4% of the sample. However, this study did not analyze the barriers between the two groups in isolation, and the main reasons reported as barriers were: "because I don't like it" (19.67%), "lack of time" (18.78%), "I do activities outside of work" (8.84%). However, when considering this general analysis, there are similarities between the barriers reported by the sample in this study.

In the study by Lima et al. [24], with a sample of 651 volunteers of both sexes, working in the administrative banking and manufacturing areas of two metallurgy companies, the barriers to LG participation were: lack of time (25.34%); excess of work (16.89%); practicing physical activity elsewhere (13.97%); inappropriate hours (11.36%). Another study by Soares et al. [25] highlighted the following barriers reported for non-adherence to LG classes: class schedule and already practicing physical activity outside working hours, as justifications for the worker's absence to them.

These studies identify a similarity with the data from this study, which highlights the need to review the organizational aspects that influence adherence to LG, related to the function responsibilities, support or not from the management, and fear of loss of productivity. In addition, the adequacy of class hours about times of highest demand in carrying out work functions to allow the rotation of workers for greater adherence. Another possibility to reduce the perception of these barriers is to increase awareness campaigns about the benefits that LG can provide to workers, as well as exploring classes as a time to promote satisfaction with the practice of physical activity, in other words, an encounter with yourself, of body and self-knowledge, of spirituality; finally, to seek a humanization through the human movement [26].

It is noteworthy that identifying the aspects that involve the perception of barriers identified by workers in non-adherence to LG is an opportunity to understand to enable the re-planning of interventions and discuss the interactions between the physical, social and organizational aspects in the workplace.

In this sense, the World Health Organization [27] emphasizes that a healthy work environment is one in which workers and managers collaborate towards sustainability in work environments through a continuous improvement process of protecting and promoting the safety, health, and well-being of workers. According to the International Society for Physical Activity [28], the workplace is also opportune for health promotion. According to the report of this institution [28], most adults spend at least a third of the day in the work environment, hence the need to improve the offer and opportunities of physical activity programs in these places to facilitate all people being physically active.

However, actions related to LG must be adapted to the various sectors, ranging from the implementation of educational events to inform workers about the benefits of physical activity and even encourage an active work culture (for example, walking or alternating standing and sitting during meetings); and offer workers paid and/or flexible time to perform physical activity.

Bredahl et al. [16] analyzed the barriers perceived by workers of a Danish company to the physical activity program in the workplace, which differs from LG. The study's results allowed for a broad discussion beyond the practical issue, such as the schedule of activities and work organization, and to consider the stages of change in behavior and intention to practice physical exercises [29]. According to the authors, when implementing programs with these characteristics, the different behavior stages must be considered to select the best intervention strategies and monitor the perception of motivation and level of physical activity practice before, during, and after these programs' implementation.

Regarding the behavior change process, Andersen & Zebis [30] highlighted the importance of contextual factors such as support and approval from higher management for workers to participate during working hours.

From this point of view, LG should not be conducted in a reductionist way, which is predominant in most programs, and aim only at the application of exercises as a means of preventing occupational diseases such as Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders. Complementarily, there is a unique opportunity to expand this approach and include other aspects, such as a healthy way of "breaking" the routine and, that can result in a positive association between the practice of physical activity and physical exercise as a promotion of health and wellness-being [9,31].

Conclusion

It was found in this study that the main barriers reported by the participants are related to organizational aspects of work, as well as behavioral ones. Therefore, an analysis of these factors is necessary, adapting them to the peculiarities of the work and the characteristics of the organization, demands, and profiles of workers in each sector.

Academic affiliation

This article represents part of the Thesis Development and Validation of a Questionnaire for the Evaluation of Labor Gymnastics Programs, authored by Valquíria Aparecida de Lima, supervised by prof. Dr. Sérgio Roberto de Lucca at the Faculdade de Ciências Médicas at the Universidade Estadual de Campinas.

Potential conflict of interest

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article have been reported.

Financing source

There were no external funding sources for this study.

Author’s contributions

Conception and design of study: Lima VA, Lucca SR; Acquisition, analysis and/or interpretation of data: Lima VA, Lucca SR, Maciel MG; Drafting the manuscript: Lima VA, Medeiros JR; Reviewing the manuscript critically for important intellectual content: Maciel MG, Lucca SR.

Acknowledgements

We thank the professional Galdino Neto de Oliveira Junior for his support in the statistical analysis of the secondary data of this work and the Congresso Científico Brasileiro de Ginástica Laboral of ABGL – Associação Brasileira de Ginástica Laboral.

References

1. Pratt M, Varela AR, Salvo D, Kohl HW, Ding D. Attacking the pandemic of physical inactivity: what is holding us back? Br J Sport Med 2020;54(13):760-62. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2019-101392 [Crossref]
2. Dempsey PC, Biddle SJH, Buman MP, Chastin S, Ekelund U, Friedenreich CM, et al. New global guidelines on sedentary behaviour and health for adults: broadening the behavioural targets. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 2020;17(151):1-12. doi: 10.1186/s12966-020-01044-0 [Crossref]
3. Kohl HW, Craig CL, Lambert EV, Inoue S, Alkandari JR, Leetongin G, et al. The pandemic of physical inactivity: global action for public health. Lancet 2012;21;380(9838):294-305. doi: 10.5167/uzh-69552 [Crossref]
4. González K, Fuentes J, Márquez JL. Physical inactivity, sedentary behavior and chronic diseases. Korean J Fam Med 2017;38(3):111-15. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.2017.38.3.111 [Crossref]
5. WHO guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Geneva: World Health Organization 2020 [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 8]. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240015111
6. Bielemann RM, da Silva BGC, Coll CVN, Xavier MO, da Silva SG. Burden of physical inactivity and hospitalization costs due to chronic diseases. Rev Saude Publica 2015;49:75. doi: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005650 [Crossref]
7. Ding D, Lawson KD, Kolbe-Alexander TL, Finkelstein EA, Katzmarzyk PT, van Mechelen W, et al. The economic burden of physical inactivity: a global analysis of major non-communicable diseases. Lancet 2016;388(10051):1311-24. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30383-X [Crossref]
8. Organização Mundial de Saúde. Plano de ação global para a atividade física 2018-2030: Mais pessoas ativas para um mundo mais saudável [Internet] 2018 [cited 2021 Jan 27]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/272721/WHO-NMH-PND-18.5-por.pdf
9. Lima V. Ginástica Laboral: atividade física no ambiente de trabalho. 4a ed. São Paulo: Phorte; 2019. 432p.
10. Maciel MG. Ginástica laboral e ergonomia: intervenção profissional. 1a ed. Jundiaí: Fontoura; 2010. 206p.
11. Laux RC, Pagliari P, Viannei J, Junior E, Corazza ST. Programa de ginástica laboral e a redução de atestados médicos. Cienc Trab 2016;18(56):130-3. doi: 10.4067/S0718-24492016000200009 [Crossref]
12. Lima FVB, Nogueira RJ da CC. A efetividade do programa de ginástica laboral. [cited 2020 Dec 8]. Rev Adm Roraima - RARR 2018;7(2):297-309. Disponível em: http://revista.ufrr.br/index.php/adminrr/. doi: 10.18227/2237-8057rarr.v7i2.3481 [Crossref]
13. Barros FC, Cabral AM, Moreira RFC, Sato TO. Does adherence to workplace-based exercises alter physical capacity, pain intensity and productivity? Eur J Physiother 2019;21(2):83-90. doi: 10.1080/21679169.2018.1485736 [Crossref]
14. Mota ACF, Silva AFR, Vieira MCA, Araújo CLO. Benefícios da ginástica laboral em ambiente hospitalar: uma revisão integrativa. Recien 2020;10(29):3-12. doi: 10.24276/rrecien2358-3088.2020.10.29.3-12 [Crossref]
15. Bardus M, Blake H, Lloyd S, Suzanne Suggs L. Reasons for participating and not participating in a e-health workplace physical activity intervention. Int J Work Heal Manag 2014;7(4). doi: 10.1108/IJWHM-11-2013-0040 [Crossref]
16. Bredahl TVG, Christensen RS, Justesen JB, Christensen JR. Adherence to physical activity in a workplace setting – A qualitative interview study. Cogent Med [Internet] 2019;6(1):1581446. doi: 10.1080/2331205X.2019.1581446 [Crossref]
17. Hunter JR, Gordon BA, Bird SR, Benson AC. Perceived barriers and facilitators to workplace exercise participation. Int J Work Heal Manag 2018;11(5):349-63. doi: 10.1108/IJWHM-04-2018-0055 [Crossref]
18. Grande JA, Silva V. Barreiras e facilitadores para a adesão à prática de atividade física no ambiente de trabalho. O Mundo da Saúde 2014;38(2). doi: 10.1590/1517-86922015210101673 [Crossref]
19. Kirwan LB, Fyfe CL, Johnstone AM. A qualitative study of workplace facilities and employee perceived barriers, motivators and attitudes to regular physical activity in the workplace. Proc Nutr Soc 2016;75(OCE3):245009. doi: 10.1017/S002966511600166X [Crossref]
20. Malik SH, Blake H, Suggs LS. A systematic review of workplace health promotion interventions for increasing physical activity. Br J Health Psychol 2014;19(1):149-80. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12052 [Crossref]
21. Strauss AL, Corbin JM. Pesquisa qualitativa: técnicas e procedimentos para o desenvolvimento de teoria fundamentada. 2a. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2008.
22. Lima VA. Desenvolvimento e validação de um questionário de avaliação de programas de ginástica laboral [Tese] [Internet]. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Campinas, SP; 2017 [cited 2020 Dec 8]. Available from: http://www.repositorio.unicamp.br/handle/REPOSIP/335622
23. Ministério da Saúde (BR). Secretaria de Vigilância em Saúde, Departamento de Análise em Saúde e Vigilância de Doenças não Transmissíveis. VIGITEL Brasil 2019 - Vigilância de fatores de risco e proteção para doenças crônicas por inquérito telefônico. Brasília; 2020. 137p. [Internet]. [cited 2021 Aug 6]. Available from: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/vigitel_brasil_2019_vigilancia_fatores_risco.pdf
24. Lima V, Romero J, Roberto SS, Raso V. Barreiras para a não aderência em programa de ginástica laboral de acordo com idade e gênero. Jundiaí; 2003. Report No.: 7o Congresso Paulista de Educação Física. [Internet] [cited Aug 6]. Available from: https://www.crefsp.gov.br/storage/app/arquivos/70c8da64129f8612ce633de28f24afcc.pdf
25. Soares RG, Assunção AV, Lima FPA. A baixa adesão ao programa de ginástica laboral: buscando elementos do trabalho para entender o problema. Rev Bras Saúde Ocup 2006;31(114):149-60. doi: 10.1590/S0303-76572006000200013 [Crossref]
26. Maciel MG, Saraiva LAS, Martins JCO, Vieira Junior PR. The humanization of physical activity in a governmental program: a necessary look. Interface 2018;22(67):1235-45. doi: 10.1590/1807-57622017.0238 [Crossref]
27. Organização Mundial da Saúde (BR). Ambientes de trabalho saudáveis: um modelo para ação: para empregadores, trabalhadores, formuladores de política e profissionais. /OMS; tradução do Serviço Social da Indústria. Brasília: SESI/DN; 2010. 26p.
28. International Society for Physical Activity and Health. Oito investimentos da ISPAH que funcionam para a atividade física [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Dec 29]. Available from: https://www.ispah.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Portuguese-Translation-Eight-Investments-That-Work-FINAL.pdf
29. Prochaska JO, Marcus BH. The transteoritical model: applications to exercice. In: Advances in exercice adherence. Champaing, llinois: Human Kinetics; 1994. p.181-91.
30. Andersen LL, Zebis MK. Process evaluation of workplace interventions with physical exercise to reduce musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Rheumatol 2014: 761363. doi: 10.1155/2014/761363 [Crossref]
31. Macedo AC, Trindade CS, Brito AP, Dantas MS. On the effects of a workplace fitness program upon pain perception: a case study encompassing office workers in a portuguese context. J Occup Rehabil 2011;21:228-33. doi: 10.1007/s10926-010-9264-2 [Crossref]