Advertisement

Low Back Pain (LBP) and Physical Work Demands

  • F. Serranheira
  • M. Sousa-Uva
  • F. Heranz
  • F. Kovacs
  • A. Sousa-Uva
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 820)

Abstract

Low back pain (LBP) is a common occupational health complaint and an important public health concern. Analyzing the association between physical demands at work and occupational outcomes can be useful for improving LBP prevention. In this study, workers filled out a questionnaire gathering data on socio-demographic and work-related characteristics, general health, LBP (episodes in the last 12 months, pain severity and intensity), and other occupational hazards related with physical demands (DMQ). 735 workers answered the questionnaire (male n = 359). They worked in different sectors. 507 (69%) reported LBP in the last year. The highest proportion of subjects with >6 episodes of LBP per year was found among public services (31.8%) and the lowest among administrative working in offices (10.3%). Most workers reported having sedentary-type work (39%), 34% a low/moderate physical intensity one, and 27% a highly physically demanding one. Results of logistic regression showed that, after adjusting for age, gender and sector: sedentary work (vs. high work intensity) was associated with a lower likelihood of having 3 to 6 LBP episodes per year (OR = 0.4; 95%CI 0.2–0.8), and >6 LBP episodes per year (OR = 0.5; 95%CI 0.3–0.9); low/moderate work intensity (vs. high work intensity) was also associated with a lower likelihood of having 3 to 6 LBP episodes per year (OR = 0.5; 95%CI 0.3–0.9) and >6 LBP episodes per year (OR = 0.6; 95%CI 0.3–1.0). Findings suggest that occupational high physical demands are associated with a higher likelihood of presenting LBP. For Occupational Health Services these results may contribute to design and assess better LBP prevention programs.

Keywords

Ergonomics Occupational health Occupational disorders 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the support of the Authority for Working Conditions (ACT – Autoridade para as Condições de Trabalho), in particular by funding project 027ESC/13: “Chronic low back pain and Work”. It is also appreciated the collaboration of the companies and their Occupational Health Services, and in particular of all workers and occupational doctors who participated in this study.

References

  1. 1.
    N.R.C./I.O.M. (The National Research Council/Institute of Occupational Medicine) (2001) Musculoskeletal disorders and the workplace: low back and upper extremities. National Academy Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Serranheira F, Sousa-Uva A (2016) Lesões musculoesqueléticas, Fatores individuais e Trabalho: interações e interdependências (1ª parte). Segurança 232:20–24Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Serranheira F, Sousa-Uva A (2016) Lesões musculoesqueléticas, Fatores individuais e Trabalho: interações e interdependências (2ª parte) Segurança 233:20–24Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Serranheira F, Uva A, Lopes F (2008) Lesões músculo-esqueléticas e trabalho: alguns métodos de avaliação do risco. Cadernos Avulso 5. Lisboa: Sociedade Portuguesa de Medicina do TrabalhoGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marras WS (2012) The complex spine: the multidimensional system of causal pathways for low-back disorders. Hum Factors 54(6):881–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hildebrandt VH, Bongers PM, van Dijk FJ, Kemper HC, Dul J (2001) Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire: description and basic qualities. Ergonomics 10;44(12):1038–1055Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Waddell G, Burton AK, Main C (2003) Screening to identify people at risk of long-term incapacity for work. A conceptual and scientific review. Disabil Med 3(3):72–83Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hartvigsen J, Lings S, Leboeuf-Yde C, Bakketeig L (2004) Psychosocial factors at work in relation to low back pain and consequences of low back pain; a systematic, critical review of prospective cohort studies. Occup Environ Med 61(1):e2Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schultz IZ, Crook JM, Berkowitz J, Meloche GR, Milner R, Zuberbier OA (2008) Biopsychosocial multivariate predictive model of occupational low back disability. In: Handbook of complex occupational disability claims. Springer, London, pp 191–202Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schultz IZ, Law AK, Cruikshank LC (2016) Prediction of occupational disability from psychological and neuropsychological evidence in forensic context. Int J Law Psychiatry 49:183–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schultz IZ, Crook J, Fraser K, Joy PW (2000) Models of diagnosis and rehabilitation in musculoskeletal pain-related occupational disability. J Occup Rehabil 10(4):271–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    White MI, Wagner SL, Schultz IZ, Murray E, Bradley SM, Hsu V et al (2015) Non-modifiable worker and workplace risk factors contributing to workplace absence: a stakeholder-centred synthesis of systematic reviews. Work 52(2):353–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Oliv S, Noor A, Gustafsson E, Hagberg M (2017) A lower level of physically demanding work is associated with excellent work ability in men and women with neck pain in different age groups. Saf Health Work 8(4):356–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Serranheira
    • 1
  • M. Sousa-Uva
    • 1
  • F. Heranz
    • 2
  • F. Kovacs
    • 3
  • A. Sousa-Uva
    • 1
  1. 1.Public Health Research Center, NOVA National School of Public HealthLisbonPortugal
  2. 2.LisbonPortugal
  3. 3.Unidad de la Espalda Kovacs, Hospital Universitario HLA-Moncloa, y Red Española de Investigadores en Dolencias de la EspaldaMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations