Effectiveness and feasibility of a 10-minute employee stress intervention: Outdoor Booster Break

ABSTRACT

There is a growing recognition that workplace environments affect employee health. Nature contact exposures in the workplace have been shown to be healthful for employees. This pilot study was designed to test the feasibility and efficacy of a daily outdoor work break (Outdoor Booster Break) compared to a daily indoor break. A census of university office staff was invited to participate (N = 244). Phase 1 focused on feasibility—participants (n = 119) reported that the Outdoor Booster Break was feasible (74%), practical (80%), and worthwhile (83%). During Phase II we used a single-site randomized controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effects of an Outdoor Booster Break—compared with a control indoor work break group—for 4 weeks on employee stress. Perceived stress was measured at pretest and posttest for both conditions. Mean posttest stress scores were lower for both the control group (n = 19) and the treatment group (n = 18). A main effects ANCOVA model controlling for baseline stress revealed posttest stress was lower for the treatment group compared to controls (p = .041). Taking a work break appears to have stress-reducing benefits, but the Outdoor Booster Break reduced stress significantly more than an indoor break. Implications for employers, worksite health promoters, and future research are discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Employees
• nature contact
• Outdoor Booster Break
• stress
• workplace