Promoting Stair Use is Possible by Displaying Signs, Even for Stairs of 80 or 105 Steps.

Ryuto Sueoka, Yoshiko Ogawa, Yoshiho Muraoka, Shigeo Kawada
{"title":"Promoting Stair Use is Possible by Displaying Signs, Even for Stairs of 80 or 105 Steps.","authors":"Ryuto Sueoka,&nbsp;Yoshiko Ogawa,&nbsp;Yoshiho Muraoka,&nbsp;Shigeo Kawada","doi":"10.1007/s10935-022-00710-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Installing signs is known to be effective in encouraging people to use stairs instead of escalators. However, it has been reported that the effectiveness of such signs is diminished as the number of stairs increases, and no effect was reported at 44 steps. Thus, this study examined whether stair use could be promoted even with 80 or 105 steps by presenting specific numerical values for the health benefits of using stairs. At two universities with parallel escalators and stairs (105 and 80 steps, respectively), we installed signs stating, \"Going up one flight of stairs increases your life span by 4 seconds.\" A one-week baseline period was followed by a one-week intervention using signs displayed to passersby. Follow-up data were also collected for one week immediately after removing the signs. Measurements were collected Monday through Friday from 7:30 to 9:15 a.m. The number of passersby was recorded by categorizing them into four attributes: male and female students, and male and female faculty/staff. A total of 25,065 observations (963 stair users vs. 24,102 escalator users) at University A and 25,677 observations (1020 stair users vs. 24,657 escalator users) at University B were recorded. Sign installation promoted stair use at University A (odds ratio [OR], 1.513; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.307-1.752) and University B (OR, 1.221; 95% CI, 1.046-1.425). However, there was no effect of the sign installation on the population with attributes that had a high percentage of stair use prior to this study, implying that there is a ceiling effect on the effectiveness of such signs. The implication of the findings is that it is effective to provide detailed information to passersby on the health benefits of stair use for stairs with 80 or 105 steps.</p>","PeriodicalId":73905,"journal":{"name":"Journal of prevention (2022)","volume":"44 3","pages":"277-289"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of prevention (2022)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-022-00710-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Installing signs is known to be effective in encouraging people to use stairs instead of escalators. However, it has been reported that the effectiveness of such signs is diminished as the number of stairs increases, and no effect was reported at 44 steps. Thus, this study examined whether stair use could be promoted even with 80 or 105 steps by presenting specific numerical values for the health benefits of using stairs. At two universities with parallel escalators and stairs (105 and 80 steps, respectively), we installed signs stating, "Going up one flight of stairs increases your life span by 4 seconds." A one-week baseline period was followed by a one-week intervention using signs displayed to passersby. Follow-up data were also collected for one week immediately after removing the signs. Measurements were collected Monday through Friday from 7:30 to 9:15 a.m. The number of passersby was recorded by categorizing them into four attributes: male and female students, and male and female faculty/staff. A total of 25,065 observations (963 stair users vs. 24,102 escalator users) at University A and 25,677 observations (1020 stair users vs. 24,657 escalator users) at University B were recorded. Sign installation promoted stair use at University A (odds ratio [OR], 1.513; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.307-1.752) and University B (OR, 1.221; 95% CI, 1.046-1.425). However, there was no effect of the sign installation on the population with attributes that had a high percentage of stair use prior to this study, implying that there is a ceiling effect on the effectiveness of such signs. The implication of the findings is that it is effective to provide detailed information to passersby on the health benefits of stair use for stairs with 80 or 105 steps.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过展示标志来促进楼梯的使用是可能的,即使是80级或105级的楼梯。
众所周知,在鼓励人们使用楼梯而不是自动扶梯方面,安装标志是有效的。然而,据报道,这些标志的有效性随着楼梯数量的增加而减弱,44级楼梯没有任何效果。因此,本研究通过提供使用楼梯的健康益处的具体数值,检验了是否可以促进楼梯的使用,即使是80或105步。在两所拥有平行扶梯和楼梯(分别为105级和80级)的大学里,我们安装了标语,上面写着:“上一层楼梯,寿命延长4秒。”一周的基线期之后是一周的干预,使用指示牌向路人展示。在移除这些征象后立即收集一周的随访数据。测量是在周一至周五上午7:30至9:15进行的。通过将他们分为四种属性来记录路人的数量:男女学生,男女教职员工。A大学共记录了25,065项观察(963名楼梯使用者对24,102名自动扶梯使用者),B大学记录了25,677项观察(1020名楼梯使用者对24,657名自动扶梯使用者)。标识装置促进了A大学楼梯的使用(比值比[OR], 1.513;95%可信区间[CI], 1.307-1.752)和大学B (OR, 1.221;95% ci, 1.046-1.425)。然而,在这项研究之前,标识安装对楼梯使用率高的人群没有影响,这意味着这种标识的有效性存在天花板效应。研究结果的含义是,向行人提供详细的信息,告诉他们爬80级或105级楼梯对健康的好处是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Global Prevalence of Metabolic Syndrome in Schizophrenia Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Pilot Implementation of Guiando Buenas Decisiones, an Evidence-Based Parenting Program for Spanish-Speaking Families, in Pediatric Primary Care in a Large, U.S. Health System: A Qualitative Interview Study. The Role of Health Literacy in Skin Cancer Preventative Behavior and Implications for Intervention: A Systematic Review. Start-Up and Implementation Costs for the Trust Based Relational Intervention. Using Digital Storytelling and Social Media to Combat COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Public Service Social Marketing Campaign.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1