Workplace Physical Activity Barriers and Facilitators: A Qualitative Study Based on Employees Physical Activity Levels.

INTRODUCTION: Lack of time, management support, insufficient facilitates, workload balance, and culture are often reported as common barriers to physical activity (PA) participation in the workplace. In comparison, identifying facilitators of PA in the workplace are scarce. A 'one-size-fits-all' approach to overcoming the barriers may also be unsuccessful within university settings where multidisciplinary workforce exists due to the heterogeneity nature of job roles. Thus, the aim of this study was to understand the perceived barriers and facilitators of PA of university employees who were classified as active or inactive based on their job roles. METHODS: Forty-one employees (female = 17; male = 24) participated in focus groups to discuss their perceived barriers and facilitators to PA in the workplace. Participants were categorised based on their PA levels as active and inactive prior analysing the semi-structured focus groups data via using thematic analysis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The results showed that a lack of time was reported by 80% of the participants as a barrier to PA, including 63% inactive and 17% of the active participants. This included 27% administrators' staff, 23% academics, 19% senior management, and 11% professional service staff. Over 75% participants reported a lack of management support as one of the perceived barriers to their PA engagement in the workplace. Approximately 58% also reported workplace culture as a barrier to PA participation. Open access to a gym on campus was perceived to be the main facilitator to engaging in PA in the future. Similarly, increased management support for engaging in PA and having flexibility during working days were perceived as facilitators for PA engagement and a way to reduced sedentary behaviour in the workplace. CONCLUSIONS: These findings contribute to the limited literature in terms of evaluating obstacles and facilitators of university employees to encourage engagement with PA in the workplace. These findings can be applied to form PA, health, and wellbeing-related interventions specifically targeting these identified barriers that are experienced in the workplace and thereby potentially reducing absenteeism and increasing productivity.

Is there a link between previous exposure to sport injury psychology education and UK sport injury rehabilitation professionals' attitudes and behaviour towards sport psychology?

OBJECTIVES: The use of sport psychology strategies during sport injury rehabilitation can lead to several positive outcomes such as improved adherence and self-efficacy. The purpose of this study was to compare the sport psychology related attitudes and behaviours of UK sport injury rehabilitation professionals (SIRPs) who had studied the psychological aspects of sport injury to those who had not. PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN: Ninety-four SIRPs (54 physiotherapists and 40 sports therapists with a mean of 9.22 years' experience of working in sport) completed an online survey and were grouped according to their level of previous exposure to sport injury psychology education at an undergraduate/postgraduate level. Analyses were undertaken to establish whether there were any differences in sport psychology related attitude (MANOVA), usage (MANOVA), and referral behaviours (chi square) between the groups. RESULTS: The MANOVA and chi square tests conducted revealed that those who had studied the psychological aspects of sport injury reported using significantly more sport psychology in their practice and making more referrals to sport psychologists. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that sport injury psychology education appears to be effective in increasing the sport psychology related behaviours (use of sport psychology and referral) of SIRPs and should be integrated into professional training.

Sport psychology education for sport injury rehabilitation professionals: a systematic review.

Sport psychology education has been shown to have a positive impact on the practice of sport injury rehabilitation professionals (SIRPs). The purpose of this paper is to review recommendations relating to such education. The paper presents a review of existing literature relating to the content and mode of delivery for a sport psychology education programme for SIRPs. The review seeks to address four questions: (1) What topic areas do researchers suggest should be integrated into the sport psychology education of SIRPs? (2) What topic areas are currently being recommended by professional bodies? (3) What are the findings of research examining the impact of sport psychology education on SIRPs? and (4) What do researchers recommend to be the most appropriate mode of delivery for sport psychology education for SIRPs? The findings of the review suggest that in order to maximise adherence amongst already qualified SIRPs sport psychology education should be delivered in a flexible short duration package. Additionally three broad areas that sport psychology education should cover emerged: (1) understanding of the psychological impact of injury, (2) interventions and psychological skills/techniques, and (3) referral and professional boundaries. This has important implications for the future training of SIRPs.