Work-break schedules for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers

Abstract

Background Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are a group of musculoskeletal disorders that comprise one of the most common disorders related to occupational sick leave worldwide. Musculoskeletal disorders accounted for 21% to 28% of work absenteeism days in 2017/2018 in the Netherlands, Germany and the UK. There are several interventions that may be e ective in tackling the high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among workers, such as physical, cognitive and organisational interventions. In this review, we will focus on work breaks as a measure of primary prevention, which are a type of organisational intervention. Objectives To compare the e ectiveness of di erent work-break schedules for preventing work-related musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers, when compared to conventional or alternate work-break schedules. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, to April/May 2019. In addition, we searched references of the included studies and of relevant literature reviews. Selection criteria We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of work-break interventions for preventing work-related musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders among workers. The studies were eligible for inclusion when intervening on work-break frequency, duration and/or type, compared to conventional or an alternate work-break intervention. We included only those studies in which the investigated population included healthy, adult workers, who were free of musculoskeletal complaints during study enrolment, without restrictions to sex or occupation. The primary outcomes were newly diagnosed musculoskeletal disorders, self-reported musculoskeletal pain, discomfort or fatigue, and productivity or work performance. We considered workload changes as secondary outcomes. Work-break schedules for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers (Review)

Active and passive work breaks during simulated laparoscopy among laparoscopic surgeons: study protocol for a controlled, randomised cross-over laboratory trial

“…In the study of Engelmann et al , 26 unstructured passive work breaks have been applied, that is, when workers just rest, in line with the definition of Luger et al . 23 In the current study, the surgeon will undergo a 2.5 min passive work break, that is, the surgeon just rests, while standing and remaining in his position next to the laparoscopic setting, allowing him to lay down the laparoscopic instruments.…”

“…The active work breaks are defined according to literature to contain stretching, mobility or relaxing exercises, walks or cognitive tasks. 23 The studies performed in the surgical field of work that investigated the implementation of active work breaks mainly contained stretching exercises. [27][28][29] For the current study, we wanted the exercises to be designed for target body regions within which surgeons regularly report perceived feelings of discomfort, fatigue or pain or even WRMSD and the exercises to focus on (1) posture correction, (2) normalisation of tissue tension and soft-tissue mobility or (3) relaxation.…”

“…A recent systematic review, however, found solely randomised controlled trials performed among workers using visual display units without any evidence for positive associations of different types, durations and frequencies of work breaks on musculoskeletal outcomes. 23 Taking breaks during surgeries does not appear to be a common habit, according to a recent survey study, within which only 4.8% of the laparoscopic surgeons indicated experiencing scheduled intraoperative breaks. 24 25 However, several studies performed in the surgical field that were not randomised controlled trials actually have shown promising results, of which the most important are no prolonged surgery duration, 26 27 reduced discomfort mainly at the shoulders, neck, hands and back, [27][28][29] and reduced error rate.…”

How much do we know about the effectiveness of warm-up intervention on work related musculoskeletal disorders, physical and psychosocial functions: protocol for a systematic review

“…To perform sensitivity analysis, studies will be considered to be at high risk of bias if one of the main biases would be rated unclear or high risk (ie, random sequence allocation, allocation concealment, incomplete outcome data or selective outcome reporting. 63 Concerning pain, the low-intensity pain threshold was defined as 3 out of 10 on a pain intensity scale. 75 76 …”

How much do we know about the effectiveness of warm-up intervention on work related musculoskeletal disorders, physical and psychosocial functions: protocol for a systematic review

“…Any disagreement between the two reviewers will be resolved by consensus or discussion with the senior review team member (NV). This extraction form could be modified from the information collected in the eligible studies but should at least specify the following information 57,59,60 :…”