Search

Background: Previous studies have shown positive effects of physical exercise at the workplace on musculoskeletal disorders. However, long-term adherence remains a challenge. The present study evaluates long-term adherence and effects of a workplace strength training intervention on back, neck and upper extremity pain among laboratory technicians., Methods: Cluster-randomized controlled trial involving 537 industrial laboratory technicians. Subjects were randomized at the cluster level to one of two groups: training group 1 (TG1, n = 282) performing supervised strength training from February to June 2009 (round one) or training group 2 (TG2, n = 255) performing supervised strength training from August to December 2009 (round two). The outcome measures were changes in self-reported pain intensity (0-9) in the back, neck and upper extremity as well as Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH, 0-100)., Results: Regular adherence, defined as at least one training session per week, was achieved by around 85% in both groups in the supervised training periods. In the intention-to-treat analyses there were significant group by time effects for pain in the neck, right shoulder, right hand and lower back and DASH-resulting in significant reductions in pain (mean 0.3 to 0.5) and DASH (mean 3.9) in the scheduled training group compared to the reference group. For TG1 there were no significant changes in pain in round two, i.e. they maintained the pain reduction achieved in round one. Subgroup analyses among those with severe pain (> = 3 on a scale of 0-9) showed a significant group by time effect for pain in the neck, right shoulder, upper back and lower back. For these subgroups the pain reduction in response to training ranged from 1.1 to 1.8., Conclusions: Specific strength training at the workplace can lead to significant long-term reductions in spinal and upper extremity pain and DASH. The pain reductions achieved during the intensive training phase with supervision appears to be maintained a half year later.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of a worksite intervention using kettlebell training to improve postural reactions to perturbation and jump performance. This single-blind randomized controlled trial involved 40 adults (n = 40) from occupations with a high prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and discomfort (mean age 44 years, body mass index 23 kg·m, 85% women). A blinded examiner took measures at baseline and follow-up. Participants were randomly assigned to a training group-doing kettlebell swings 3 times a week for 8 weeks-or to a control group. The outcome measures were postural reactions to sudden perturbation and maximal countermovement jump height. Compared with the control group, the training group had a significant decreased stopping time after perturbation (-109 ms, 95% confidence interval [-196 to -21]). Jump height increased significantly in the training group (1.5 cm, 95% confidence interval [0.5 to 2.5]), but this was nonsignificantly different from control. Kettlebell training improves postural reactions to sudden perturbation. Future studies should investigate whether kettlebell training can reduce the risk of low back injury in occupations with manual material handling or patient handling where sudden perturbations often occur.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the dose-response of strength training for relieving musculoskeletal pain in female office workers. The relation between the dose of training in terms of total training volume (sets × repetitions × load reported in training diaries) during a 16-week strength training program and changes in pain (calculated as pain index, 0-100%, from self-reported intensities and durations of pain in the upper body and low back) was determined by regression analysis. The women were part of a randomized controlled trial with specific strength training (SRT), all-round physical exercise (APE), and a reference group (REF). Results showed that pain index in SRT and APE decreased significantly from baseline to follow-up (-25%/-22%) compared with changes in REF (-15%). In the dose-response analysis within the SRT group (n = 125), the total volume of training (mean 18.056 kg, SD = 13.798) was negatively correlated with changes in pain index (β = -0.16, p = 0.045), and there was a significant dose-response relationship between training volume per session and change in pain index (β = -0.20, p = 0.034). In contrast, training attendance (mean 1.69 sessions per week, SD = 0.8) was not significantly related to the change in pain index. In conclusion, achieving higher accumulated training volumes was important for reducing musculoskeletal pain in female office workers. The training volume per session should be optimized by securing a load at 10-15 repetition maximum and adhering to principles of progressive overload.

Background: Neck and shoulder complaints are common among employees in sedentary occupations characterized by intensive computer use. Specific strength training is a promising type of physical exercise for relieving neck and shoulder pain in office workers. However, the optimal combination of frequency and exercise duration, as well as the importance of exercise supervision, is unknown. The VIMS study investigates in a cluster randomized controlled design the effectiveness of different time wise combinations of specific strength training with identical accumulated volume, and the relevance of training supervision for safe and effective training., Methods/design: A cluster randomized controlled trial of 20 weeks duration where employed office workers are randomized to 1 x 60 min, 3 x 20 min, 9 x 7 min per week of specific strength training with training supervision, to 3 x 20 min per week of specific strength training with a minimal amount of training supervision, or to a reference group without training. A questionnaire will be sent to 2000 employees in jobs characterized by intensive computer work. Employees with cardiovascular disease, trauma, hypertension, or serious chronic disease will be excluded. The main outcome measure is pain in the neck and shoulders at week 20., Trial Registration: The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01027390.

This study investigated effects of physical exercise on musculoskeletal pain symptoms in all regions of the body, as well as on other musculoskeletal pain in association with neck pain. A single blind randomized controlled trial testing a one-year exercise intervention was performed among 549 office workers; specific neck/shoulder resistance training, all-round physical exercise, or a reference intervention. Pain symptoms were determined by questionnaire screening of twelve selected body regions. Case individuals were identified for each body region as those reporting pain intensities at baseline of 3 or more (scale of 0-9) during the last three months. For neck cases specifically, the additional number of pain regions was counted. Intensity of pain decreased significantly more in the neck, low back, right elbow and right hand in cases of the two exercise groups compared with the reference group (P<0.0001-0.05). The additional number of pain regions in neck cases decreased in the two exercise groups only (P<0.01-0.05). In individuals with no or minor pain at baseline, development of pain was minor in all three groups. In conclusion, both specific resistance training and all-round physical exercise for office workers caused better effects than a reference intervention in relieving musculoskeletal pain symptoms in exposed regions of the upper body.

Purpose: The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of three different workplace interventions on long-term compliance, muscle strength gains, and neck/shoulder pain in office workers., Methods: A 1-yr randomized controlled intervention trial was done with three groups: specific resistance training (SRT, n = 180), all-round physical exercise (APE, n = 187), and reference intervention (REF, n = 182) with general health counseling. Physical tests were performed and questionnaires answered at pre-, mid-, and postintervention. The main outcome measures were compliance, changes in maximal muscle strength, and changes in intensity of neck/shoulder pain (scale 0-9) in those with and without pain at baseline., Results: Regular participation was achieved by 54%, 31%, and 16% of those of the participants who answered the questionnaire in SRT (78%), APE (81%), and REF (80%), respectively, during the first half of the intervention period, and decreased to 35%, 28% and 9%, respectively, during the second half. Shoulder elevation strength increased 9-11% in SRT and APE (P < 0.0001). Participants with neck pain at baseline decreased the intensity of neck pain through SRT, from 5.0 +/- 0.2 to 3.4 +/- 0.2 (P < 0.0001), and through APE, from 5.0 +/- 0.2 to 3.6 +/- 0.2 (P < 0.001), whereas REF caused no change. For participants without shoulder pain at baseline, there was a significantly greater increase in pain over the 1-yr period in REF compared with SRT and APE (P < 0.01)., Conclusion: Compliance was highest in SRT but generally decreased over time. SRT and APE caused increased shoulder elevation strength, were more effective than REF to decrease neck pain among those with symptoms at baseline, and prevent development of shoulder pain in those without symptoms at baseline.

Study Design: Experimental study of the effect of physical training on the reaction to sudden back loading., Objective: To investigate the effect and sustainability of "on the job training" on the reaction to sudden back loading among employees at a geriatric ward., Summary of Background Data: Available data suggest that a delayed muscle reflex response to sudden trunk loading may increase the risk of low back injuries. We have previously shown that training may alter the response to sudden trunk loading in healthy subjects and decrease the time elapsed until stopping of the forward movement of the trunk (stopping time). Data on the possibilities of a training-induced improvement in the reflex response among workers exposed to sudden trunk loading on the job are, however, nonexistent, and there is no evidence of long-term benefits, i.e., the sustainability of a positive training effect., Methods: The study included 23 participants and 14 controls. All were healthy without prior history of low back pain (LBP). The training group participated in a total of 18 training sessions during a 9-week period. The training focused on reactions to a variety of sudden trunk loadings. Before and after the training intervention and at a 1-year follow-up, all subjects were tested for their reaction to expected and unexpected sudden trunk loading by applying a horizontal force of 58 N to the upper back of the subjects and measuring the electromyographic (EMG) response from the erector spinae muscles., Results: In the training group, the stopping time and the distance moved after unexpected sudden trunk loading decreased significantly (13%-19%, P = 0.02). The improved stopping time was associated with marked changes in the time-wise distribution of the EMG signal after training. In addition, the follow-up study showed a high sustainability of the training effect., Conclusions: The results demonstrated a training-induced improvement of the response to sudden trunk loading that may be beneficial in workers, such as nurses, who are exposed to sudden trunk perturbations during patient handling.