Geertje A. M. Ariëns

Flexion and rotation of the trunk and lifting at work are risk factors for low back pain: results of a prospective cohort study.

Study Design. A 3-year prospective cohort study among workers of 34 companies in the Netherlands. Objectives. To investigate the relation between flexion and rotation of the trunk and lifting at work and the occurrence of low back pain. Summary of Background Data. Previous studies on work-related physical risk factors for low back pain either lacked quantification of the physical load or did not take confounding by individual and psychosocial factors into account. Methods. The study population consisted of 861 workers with no low back pain at baseline and complete data on the occurrence of low back pain during the 3-year follow-up period. Physical load at work was assessed by means of analyses of video-recordings. Information on other risk factors and the occurrence of low back pain was obtained by means of self-administered questionnaires. Results. An increased risk of low back pain was observed for workers who worked with the trunk in a minimum of 60° of flexion for more than 5% of the working time (RR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.1), for workers who worked with the trunk in a minimum of 30° of rotation for more than 10% of the working time (RR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9–1.9), and for workers who lifted a load of at least 25 kg more than 15 times per working day (RR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.3). Conclusions. Flexion and rotation of the trunk and lifting at work are moderate risk factors for low back pain, especially at greater levels of exposure.

Psychosocial risk factors for neck pain: A systematic review

BACKGROUND Neck pain, which is assumed to be a multifactorial disease, is a major problem in modern society. METHODS To identify the most important psychosocial risk factors for neck pain, a systematic review of the literature was carried out. The methodological quality of all studies in the review was assessed. Four levels of evidence were defined to assess the strength of evidence for potential risk factors for neck pain (strong, moderate, some or inconclusive evidence). RESULTS Some evidence was found for a positive relationship between neck pain and high quantitative job demands, low social (coworker) support, low job control, high and low skill discretion and low job satisfaction. Inconclusive evidence was found for high job strain, low supervisor support, conflicts at work, low job security, and limited rest break opportunities. CONCLUSIONS The procedure of the assessment of the methodological quality and the rating system applied to distinguish between high- and low-score studies, had a considerable influence on the level of evidence, indicating that changes in this procedure may have a major impact on the overall conclusions of this review.

High physical work load and low job satisfaction increase the risk of sickness absence due to low back pain: Results of a prospective cohort study

Objective: To determine whether physical and psychosocial load at work influence sickness absence due to low back pain. Methods: The research was a part of the study on musculoskeletal disorders, absenteeism, stress, and health (SMASH), a 3 year prospective cohort study on risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders. Workers from 21 companies located throughout The Netherlands participated in the part of this study on sickness absence due to low back pain. The study population consisted of 732 workers with no sickness absences of 3 days or longer due to low back pain in the 3 months before the baseline survey and complete data on the reasons for absences during the follow up period. The mean (range) period of follow up in this group was 37 (7–44) months. Physical load at work was assessed by analyses of video recordings. Baseline information on psychosocial work characteristics was obtained by a questionnaire. Data on sickness absence were collected from company records. The main outcome measure was the rate of sickness absences of 3 days or longer due to low back pain during the follow up period. Results: After adjustment of the work related physical and psychosocial factors for each other and for other potential determinants, significant rate ratios ranging from 2.0 to 3.2 were found for trunk flexion, trunk rotation, lifting, and low job satisfaction. A dose-response relation was found for trunk flexion, but not for trunk rotation or lifting. Non-significant rate ratios of about 1.4 were found for low supervisor support and low coworker support. Quantitative job demands, conflicting demands, decision authority, and skill discretion showed no relation with sickness absence due to low back pain. Conclusions: Flexion and rotation of the trunk, lifting, and low job satisfaction are risk factors for sickness absence due to low back pain. Some indications of a relation between low social support, either from supervisors or coworkers, and sickness absence due to low back pain are also present.

Are neck flexion, neck rotation, and sitting at work risk factors for neck pain? Results of a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE To study the relation between neck pain and work related neck flexion, neck rotation, and sitting. METHODS A prospective cohort study was performed with a follow up of 3 years among 1334 workers from 34 companies. Work related physical load was assessed by analysing objectively measured exposure data (video recordings) of neck flexion, neck rotation, and sitting posture. Neck pain was assessed by a questionnaire. Adjustments were made for various physical factors that were related or not related to work, psychosocial factors, and individual characteristics. RESULTS A significant positive relation was found between the percentage of the working time in a sitting position and neck pain, implying an increased risk of neck pain for workers who were sitting for more than 95% of the working time (crude relative risk (RR) 2.01, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.04 to 3.88; adjusted RR 2.34, 95% CI 1.05 to 5.21). A trend for a positive relation between neck flexion and neck pain was found, suggesting an increased risk of neck pain for people working with the neck at a minimum of 20° of flexion for more than 70% of the working time (crude RR 2.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 4.11; adjusted RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.70 to 3.82). No clear relation was found between neck rotation and neck pain. CONCLUSION Sitting at work for more than 95% of the working time seems to be a risk factor for neck pain and there is a trend for a positive relation between neck flexion and neck pain. No clear relation was found between neck rotation and neck pain.

High Quantitative Job Demands and Low Coworker Support As Risk Factors for Neck Pain : Results of a Prospective Cohort Study

Study Design. A 3-year prospective cohort study among 1334 workers was conducted. Objective. To determine whether the work-related psychosocial factors of quantitative job demands, conflicting job demands, skill discretion, decision authority, supervisor support, coworker support, and job security are risk factors for neck pain. Summary of Background Data. Among the various risk factors for neck pain, work-related psychosocial factors play a major role. Previous studies on risk factors for neck pain often had a cross-sectional design, and did not take both physical and psychosocial factors into account. Methods. At baseline, data on work-related psychosocial factors were collected by means of a questionnaire. During the 3-year follow-up period, data on the occurrence of neck pain were collected by means of postal questionnaires. Individuals without neck pain at baseline were selected for the analyses. Cox regression analysis was applied to examine the relation between the work-related psychosocial factors and the cumulative incidence of neck pain. Adjustments were made for various physical factors and individual characteristics. Results. The analysis included 977 patients. Altogether, 141 workers (14.4%) reported that they had experienced neck pain at least once during the 3-year follow-up period. The relation of neck pain to high quantitative job demands (relative risk [RR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28–3.58) and low coworker support (RR, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.11–5.29) was statistically significant. An increased risk was found for low decision authority in relation to neck pain (RR, 1.60; 95% CI, 0.74–3.45), but this relation was not statistically significant. Conclusions. High quantitative job demands and low coworker support are independent risk factors for neck pain. There are indications that another risk factor for neck pain is low decision authority.

Phone and e-mail counselling are effective for weight management in an overweight working population: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundThe work setting provides an opportunity to introduce overweight (i.e., Body Mass Index ≥ 25 kg/m2) adults to a weight management programme, but new approaches are needed in this setting. The main purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of lifestyle counselling by phone or e-mail on body weight, in an overweight working population. Secondary purposes were to establish effects on waist circumference and lifestyle behaviours, and to assess which communication method is the most effective.MethodsA randomized controlled trial with three treatments: intervention materials with phone counselling (phone group); a web-based intervention with e-mail counselling (internet group); and usual care, i.e. lifestyle brochures (control group). The interventions used lifestyle modification and lasted a maximum of six months. Subjects were 1386 employees, recruited from seven companies (67% male; mean age 43 (SD 8.6) y; mean BMI 29.6 (SD 3.5) kg/m2). Body weight was measured by research personnel and by questionnaire. Secondary outcomes fat, fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity and waist circumference were assessed by questionnaire. Measurements were done at baseline and after six months. Missing body weight was multiply imputed.ResultsBody weight reduced 1.5 kg (95% CI -2.2;-0.8, p < 0.001) in the phone group and 0.6 kg (95% CI -1.3; -0.01, p = 0.045) in the internet group, compared with controls. In completers analyses, weight and waist circumference in the phone group were reduced with 1.6 kg (95% CI -2.2;-1.0, p < 0.001) and 1.9 cm (95% CI -2.7;-1.0, p < 0.001) respectively, fat intake decreased with 1 fatpoint (1 to 4 grams)/day (95% CI -1.7;-0.2, p = 0.01) and physical activity increased with 866 METminutes/week (95% CI 203;1530, p = 0.01), compared with controls. The internet intervention resulted in a weight loss of 1.1 kg (95% CI -1.7;-0.5, p < 0.001) and a reduction in waist circumference of 1.2 cm (95% CI -2.1;-0.4, p = 0.01), in comparison with usual care. The phone group appeared to have more and larger changes than the internet group, but comparisons revealed no significant differences.ConclusionLifestyle counselling by phone and e-mail is effective for weight management in overweight employees and shows potential for use in the work setting.Trial registrationISCRTN04265725.

The effectiveness of a work style intervention and a lifestyle physical activity intervention on the recovery from neck and upper limb symptoms in computer workers

Abstract This study assessed the effectiveness of a single intervention targeting work style and a combined intervention targeting work style and physical activity on the recovery from neck and upper limb symptoms. Computer workers with frequent or long‐term neck and upper limb symptoms were randomised into the work style group (WS, n = 152), work style and physical activity group (WSPA, n = 156), or usual care group (n = 158). The WS and WSPA group attended six group meetings. All meetings focused on behavioural change with regard to body posture, workplace adjustment, breaks and coping with high work demands (WS and WSPA group) and physical activity (WSPA group). Pain, disability at work, days with symptoms and months without symptoms were measured at baseline and after 6 (T1) and 12 months (T2). Self‐reported recovery was assessed at T1/T2. Both interventions were ineffective in improving recovery. The work style intervention but not the combined intervention was effective in reducing all pain measures. These effects were present in the neck/shoulder, not in the arm/wrist/hand. For the neck/shoulder, the work style intervention group also showed an increased recovery‐rate. Total physical activity increased in all study groups but no differences between groups were observed. To conclude, a group‐based work style intervention focused on behavioural change was effective in improving recovery from neck/shoulder symptoms and reducing pain on the long‐term. The combined intervention was ineffective in increasing total physical activity. Therefore we cannot draw conclusions on the effect of increasing physical activity on the recovery from neck and upper limb symptoms.

The Effects of a Graded Activity Intervention for Low Back Pain in Occupational Health on Sick Leave, Functional Status and Pain: 12-Month Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction: Behaviorally oriented graded activity interventions have been suggested for sick-listed workers with low back pain on return to work, but have not been extensively evaluated. Methods: One hundred and thirty-four workers were randomly assigned to either a graded activity intervention (n = 67) or usual care (n = 67) and followed-up for 12 months. Results: The graded activity group returned back to work faster with a median of 54 days compared to 67 days in the usual care group. The graded activity intervention was more effective after approximately 50 days post-randomization (HRR = 1.9, CI = 1.2–3.1, p = 0.01). Differences between the groups in number of recurrent episodes, total number of days of sick leave due to low back pain, and total number of days of sick leave due to all diagnoses, were in favor of the graded activity group, although not statistically significant. No effects of the graded activity intervention were found for functional status or pain. Conclusion: Graded activity intervention is a valuable strategy to enhance short-term return to work outcomes.

Physical capacity in relation to low back, neck, or shoulder pain in a working population

Aims: To investigate the longitudinal relation between physical capacity (isokinetic lifting strength, static endurance of the back, neck, and shoulder muscles, and mobility of the spine) and low back, neck, and shoulder pain. Methods: In this prospective cohort study, 1789 Dutch workers participated. At baseline, isokinetic lifting strength, static endurance of the back, neck, and shoulder muscles, and mobility of the spine were measured in the pain free workers, as well as potential confounders, including physical workload. Low back, neck, and shoulder pain were self-reported annually at baseline and three times during follow up. Results: After adjustment for confounders, Poisson generalised estimation equations showed an increased risk of low back pain among workers in the lowest sex specific tertile of performance in the static back endurance tests compared to workers in the reference category (RR = 1.42; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.71), but this was not found for isokinetic trunk lifting strength or mobility of the spine. An increased risk of neck pain was shown for workers with low performance in tests of isokinetic neck/shoulder lifting strength (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.67) and static neck endurance (RR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.49). Among workers in the lowest tertiles of isokinetic neck/shoulder lifting strength or endurance of the shoulder muscles, no increased risk of shoulder pain was found. Conclusions: The findings of this study suggest that low back or neck endurance were independent predictors of low back or neck pain, respectively, and that low lifting neck/shoulder strength was an independent predictor of neck pain. No association was found between lifting trunk strength, or mobility of the spine and the risk of low back pain, nor between lifting neck/shoulder strength or endurance of the shoulder muscles and the risk of shoulder pain.

ALIFE@Work: a randomised controlled trial of a distance counselling lifestyle programme for weight control among an overweight working population (ISRCTN04265725)

BackgroundThe prevalence of overweight is increasing and its consequences will cause a major public health burden in the near future. Cost-effective interventions for weight control among the general population are therefore needed. The ALIFE@Work study is investigating a novel lifestyle intervention, aimed at the working population, with individual counselling through either phone or e-mail. This article describes the design of the study and the participant flow up to and including randomisation.Methods/DesignALIFE@Work is a controlled trial, with randomisation to three arms: a control group, a phone based intervention group and an internet based intervention group. The intervention takes six months and is based on a cognitive behavioural approach, addressing physical activity and diet. It consists of 10 lessons with feedback from a personal counsellor, either by phone or e-mail, between each lesson. Lessons contain educational content combined with behaviour change strategies. Assignments in each lesson teach the participant to apply these strategies to every day life.The study population consists of employees from seven Dutch companies. The most important inclusion criteria are having a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25 kg/m2 and being an employed adult.Primary outcomes of the study are body weight and BMI, diet and physical activity. Other outcomes are: perceived health; empowerment; stage of change and self-efficacy concerning weight control, physical activity and eating habits; work performance/productivity; waist circumference, sum of skin folds, blood pressure, total blood cholesterol level and aerobic fitness. A cost-utility- and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed as well.Physiological outcomes are measured at baseline and after six and 24 months. Other outcomes are measured by questionnaire at baseline and after six, 12, 18 and 24 months.Statistical analyses for short term (six month) results are performed with multiple linear regression. Analyses for long term (two year) results are performed with multiple longitudinal regression. Analyses for cost-effectiveness and cost-utility are done at one and two years, using bootstrapping techniques.DiscussionALIFE@Work will make a substantial contribution to the development of cost-effective weight control- and lifestyle interventions that are applicable to and attractive for the large population at risk.