Search

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are the main contributor to disability levels, which are rising as populations age. Workplace hazard exposures are a major source of this problem, and current workplace risk management practices require substantial changes to tackle it more effectively. Most importantly, the current focus of risk management on "manual handling" tasks must broaden to encompass the whole job. This is necessary because a wide range of psychosocial hazards, most of which operate across the whole job rather than particular tasks, are significant contributors to risk. To ensure that risk-control actions are effective, a recurring risk management cycle that includes worker participation and addresses risk from both biomechanical and psychosocial hazards will be essential. Legislation that mandates workplace management of psychosocial hazards would be helpful. Amendment by regulatory bodies of MSD-related guidance and codes of practice so that they reflect current research evidence would also be helpful in communicating the need for change to workplace stakeholders., (© 2024 The Authors. Journal of Cellular Physiology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: Workplace management practices targeting risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) fail to reflect evidence that risk is affected by psychosocial as well as physical hazards. To promote improved practices in occupations where MSD risk is highest, better information is needed on how psychosocial hazards, combined with physical hazards, affect risk of workers in these occupations., Methods: Survey ratings of physical and psychosocial hazards by 2329 Australian workers in occupations with high MSD risk were subjected to Principal Components Analysis. Latent Profile Analysis of hazard factor scores identified different combinations of hazards to which latent subgroups of workers were typically exposed. Survey ratings of frequency and severity of musculoskeletal discomfort or pain (MSP) generated a pre-validated MSP score and its relationship with subgroup membership was analysed. Demographic variables associated with group membership were investigated using regression modelling and descriptive statistics., Results: Analyses identified three physical and seven psychosocial hazard factors and three participant subgroups with differing hazard profiles. Profile group differences were greater for psychosocial than physical hazards, and MSP scores out of 60 ranged from 6.7 for the low hazard profile (29% of participants) to 17.5 for the high hazard profile (21%). Differences between occupations in hazard profiles were not large., Conclusions: Both physical and psychosocial hazards affect MSD risk of workers in high-risk occupations. In workplaces such as this large Australian sample where risk management has focused on physical hazards, actions targeting psychosocial hazards may now be the most effective way to reduce risk further., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare this paper has not been published elsewhere and they have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Effects of psychosocial hazards on risk of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are often very substantial, but workplace risk management practices focus largely on biomechanical hazards, as do the risk assessment methods used by ergonomists. Translation of research evidence into more effective workplace practices demands a more holistic risk management framework that encompasses both types of hazard. In this context, we evaluate the validity of different MSD risk assessment methods for different purposes, focusing particularly on requirements for routine workplace risk management. These include choice of fit-for-purpose assessment methods, prioritisation of hazards that are most affecting risk, and control actions as high as possible in the risk control hierarchy. Ergonomists could facilitate more effective workplace risk management by promoting: awareness of the need for change; improvements to guidance from OHS regulators; research on MSD-related workplace management issues; and professional development programs on this topic for ergonomists and other OHS practitioners., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Prevention of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) requires the identification of physical and psychosocial hazards. This systematic review aimed to identify accessible and validated tools, for the assessment of workplace physical and psychosocial hazards, and consolidate the results into a matrix for use by work health and safety (WHS) professionals. Web of Science, Medline, ProQuest Central, and PsychInfo electronic databases, along with grey literature, were searched (Jan 1990 to July 2020). Studies that included tools with evidence of validity for the identification of physical hazards, psychosocial hazards, or both were included. A total of 83 tools were identified and then reviewed to ensure the tools were accessible. The final matrix included a total of 26 tools (16 physical, 4 psychosocial, and 6 comprehensive [physical and psychosocial]). Evidence on best practice for MSD mitigation supports the need for a comprehensive approach; however, the current review identified limitations in the availability of such tools to support WHS professionals., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Musculoskeletal pain (MSP) is a substantial societal and personal burden resulting in loss of employment and reduced productivity. Prosthetics and orthotics professionals working in Australia have previously reported a high prevalence of MSP; however, little is known about the prosthetic and orthotic communities in other countries., Objectives: To explore the prevalence and range of workplace exposures associated with MSP in a convenience sample of the international prosthetic and orthotic profession., Study Design: A cross-sectional study using a convenience sample was conducted with prosthetists and orthotists worldwide., Methods: Prosthetists and orthotists were invited to participate in a survey to explore work-related factors associated with MSP. Bivariate and regression modelling was used to examine associations between self-reported demographic and workplace characteristics including job satisfaction, work-life balance, and physical and psychosocial hazards., Results: Seventy-six percent of respondents (n = 173) reported MSP in the previous 6 months. However, MSP was associated with different factors in Australia compared with other countries. Among Australia-based prosthetists and orthotists, MSP was associated with sex, physical hazards, and psychosocial hazards. For the international sample, MSP was only associated with length of employment., Conclusions: Three-quarters of all respondents reported having MSP. Differences in associations between MSP and other factors by respondents' geographical location suggest the need for context-specific identification of hazards to enable the development of targeted and contextually appropriate prevention strategies., (Copyright © 2021 International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics.)

Objective: This study explored the role of occupational physical activity (OPA), physical demands and psychosocial work-related factors on low back pain (LBP) and neck-shoulder pain (NSP) amongst workers with physically demanding professions., Methods: Data from 331 participants within the service and manufacturing sector in the Flemish Employees' Physical Activity (FEPA) study were used, with objective measures of OPA and subjective measures of physical and psychosocial work environment. A modified Nordic questionnaire collected data on LBP and NSP., Results: LBP (> 30 days over a year) was reported by 25% of participants, NSP (> 30 days over a year) by 30% and the composite measure of LBP/NSP simultaneously by 17%. Objective measures of OPA were not significantly associated with any pain groups. In the final model, self-reported physical demands were associated with NSP (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.30-3.18) and LBP/NSP (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.16-3.45) but not LBP. Job control was negatively associated with LBP (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.99) and LBP/NSP (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.3-0.98)., Conclusion: Objective measures were not associated with LBP or NSP. Self-reported measures provided insights into potential workplace hazards such as physical demands and job control which can be used to inform future strategies to prevent the development of LBP and NSP., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective . This study aims to determine the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in prosthetists/orthotists working in Australia. Secondary to this, the relationship between work-related hazards and work-related musculoskeletal disorders will be examined. Methods . In 2012, a self-report survey was conducted with the prosthetist/orthotist workforce in Australia ( N  = 139, 56% response rate). Data on workplace physical and psychosocial hazards, job satisfaction, work-life balance and musculoskeletal discomfort were collected. Predictors of work-related musculoskeletal disorders were assessed using logistic regression analysis. Results . Prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders was 80%. Gender ( β  = 1.31, p  = 0.030), total weekly hours ( β  = 0.9, p  < 0.010) and physical ( β  = 1.91, p  < 0.010) and psychosocial ( β  = 1.28, p  < 0.010) hazards were all associated with reporting of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Females reported higher levels of work-related musculoskeletal disorder discomfort than males in all body areas. Conclusions . Work-related musculoskeletal disorders prevalence is high in prosthetists/orthotists. This suggests that focus on workplace injury prevention is required. Targeted prevention requires systematic identification and then control of all relevant workplace hazards.

Background: Previous research identified an association between work-family conflict and musculoskeletal pain. This study explores how conflict arising from participating in both the work and nonwork domains might influence the relationships between musculoskeletal pain experienced by workers and particular work-related hazards., Methods: A cross-sectional survey of data was collected from 401 workers in Belgium across seven organizations in the service and production sector. Subjective measures of the physical and psychosocial work environments, and musculoskeletal pain, were collected by questionnaire, using either an online or paper version. Moderation analyses were conducted using PROCESS v. 3.5 and SPSS v. 26., Results: Work-related hazards appeared to directly influence musculoskeletal pain differently for men and women. In addition, low levels of work-family conflict and supervisor support combined interactively to reduce low back pain in women. For men, the combination of high physical demands and relatively high work-family conflict were associated with increased levels of low back pain., Conclusions: Addressing the work-life interface is worthy of further investigation as a legitimate means through which musculoskeletal pain can be reduced. Musculoskeletal risk management strategies need to include risk factors related to the work-life interface, along with those related to physical and psychosocial work-related hazards., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large network of experts. Evidence from mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors may cause selected other musculoskeletal diseases, other than back or neck pain (MSD) or osteoarthritis of hip or knee (OA). In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of parameters for estimating the number of disability-adjusted life years from MSD or OA that are attributable to occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates., Objectives: We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors (force exertion, demanding posture, repetitiveness, hand-arm vibration, lifting, kneeling and/or squatting, and climbing) on MSD and OA (two outcomes: prevalence and incidence)., Data Sources: We developed and published a protocol, applying the Navigation Guide as an organizing systematic review framework where feasible. We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including the International Trials Register, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts., Study Eligibility and Criteria: We included working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the effect of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors (any exposure to force exertion, demanding posture, repetitiveness, hand-arm vibration, lifting, kneeling and/or squatting, and climbing ≥ 2 h/day) compared with no or low exposure to the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (<2 h/day) on the prevalence or incidence of MSD or OA., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. Missing data were requested from principal study authors. We combined odds ratios using random-effect meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using Navigation Guide tools adapted to this project., Results: In total eight studies (4 cohort studies and 4 case control studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 2,378,729 participants (1,157,943 females and 1,220,786 males) in 6 countries in 3 WHO regions (Europe, Eastern Mediterranean and Western Pacific). The exposure was measured using self-reports in most studies and with a job exposure matrix in one study and outcome was generally assessed with physician diagnostic records or administrative health data. Across included studies, risk of bias was generally moderate. Compared with no or low exposure (<2 h per day), any occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors increased the risk of acquiring MSD (odds ratio (OR) 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14 to 2.72, 4 studies, 2,376,592 participants, I 2 70%); and increased the risk of acquiring OA of knee or hip (OR 2.20, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.40, 3 studies, 1,354 participants, I 2 13%); Subgroup analysis for MSD found evidence for differences by sex, but indicated a difference in study type, where OR was higher among study participants in a case control study compared to study participants in cohort studies., Conclusions: Overall, for both outcomes, the main body of evidence was assessed as being of low quality. Occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors increased the risk of acquiring MSD and of acquiring OA of knee or hip. We judged the body of human evidence on the relationship between exposure to occupational ergonomic factors and MSD as "limited evidence of harmfulness" and the relationship between exposure to occupational ergonomic factors and OA also as "limited evidence of harmfulness". These relative risks might perhaps be suitable as input data for WHO/ILO modelling of work-related burden of disease and injury. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.053 PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018102631., (Copyright © 2021 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large network of experts. Evidence from mechanistic and human data suggests that occupational exposure to ergonomic (or physical) risk factors may cause osteoarthritis and other musculoskeletal diseases (excluding rheumatoid arthritis, gout, and back and neck pain). In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of occupational exposure to physical ergonomic risk factors for estimating the number of disability-adjusted life years from these diseases that are attributable to exposure to this risk factor, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates., Objectives: We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors for osteoarthritis and other musculoskeletal diseases., Data Sources: We searched electronic bibliographic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts., Study Eligibility and Criteria: We included working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. The exposure was defined as any occupational exposure to one or more of: force exertion, demanding posture, repetitive movement, hand-arm vibration, kneeling or squatting, lifting, and/or climbing. We included all study types with an estimate of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates using random-effect meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates., Results: Five studies (three cross-sectional studies and two cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising 150,895 participants (81,613 females) in 36 countries in two WHO regions (Africa, Europe). The exposure was generally assessed with questionnaire data about self-reported exposure. Estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors are presented for all five included studies, disaggregated by country, sex, 5-year age group, industrial sector or occupational group where feasible. The pooled prevalence of any occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.84, 3 studies, 148,433 participants, 35 countries in the WHO Europe region, I 2 100%, low quality of evidence). Subgroup analyses found no statistically significant differences in exposure by sex but differences by age group, occupation and country. No evidence was found for publication bias. We assessed this body evidence to be of low quality, based on serious concerns for risk of bias due to exposure assessment only being based on self-report and for indirectness due to evidence from two WHO regions only., Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis found that occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors is highly prevalent. The current body of evidence is, however, limited, especially by risk of bias and indirectness. Producing estimates for the burden of disease attributable to occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors appears evidence-based, and the pooled effect estimates presented in this systematic review may perhaps be used as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. Protocol identifier:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.053. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018102631., (Copyright © 2020 World Health Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) continue as one of the largest occupational health and safety problems worldwide. One reason for this situation is that current workplace risk management practices fail to meet some important evidence-based requirements for effective reduction of MSD risk. In particular: they largely fail to address risk arising from psychosocial hazards; do not allow sufficient participation by workers; and often fail to control risk at its sources.To address these deficiencies, A Participative Hazard Identification and Risk Management (APHIRM) toolkit has been formulated in accordance with both a framework developed by the World Health Organisation and implementation science principles. It comprises a set of online tools that include automated data analysis and reporting modules, and procedures to guide users through the five stages of the conventional risk management cycle. Importantly, it assesses both hazard and risk levels for groups of people doing a particular job, focusing on the job overall rather than only on tasks deemed to be hazardous. Its intended users are workplace managers and consultants responsible for occupational health and safety, with active participation from workers also. Resultant risk control interventions are customized to address the main physical and psychosocial hazards identified for the target job, and repetitions of the risk management cycle enables ongoing evaluation of outcomes in terms of both hazard and risk levels.

Objective: To study the trajectories of work ability and investigate the impact of multisite pain and working conditions on pathways of work ability over a six-year period., Methods: The longitudinal study was conducted with Finnish food industry workers ( n = 866) with data collected every 2 years from 2003-2009. Questions covered musculoskeletal pain, physical and psychosocial working conditions (physical strain, repetitive movements, awkward postures; mental strain, team support, leadership, possibility to influence) and work ability. Latent class growth analysis and logistic regression were used to analyse the impact of multisite pain and working conditions on work ability trajectories (pathways)., Results: Three trajectories of work ability emerged: decreasing (5%), increasing (5%), and good (90%). In the former two trajectories, the mean score of work ability changed from good to poor and poor to good during follow-up, while in the latter, individuals maintained good work ability during the follow-up. In the multivariable adjusted model, number of pain sites was significantly associated with higher odds of belonging to the trajectory of poor work ability (Odds ratio (OR) 4 pain sites 2.96, 1.25-7.03)., Conclusions: A substantial number of employees maintained good work ability across the follow up. However, for employees with poor work ability, multisite musculoskeletal pain has an important influence, with effective prevention strategies required to reduce its prevalence.

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing a joint methodology for estimating the national and global work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO joint methodology), with contributions from a large network of experts. In this paper, we present the protocol for two systematic reviews of parameters for estimating the number of disability-adjusted life years from osteoarthritis of hip or knee, and selected other musculoskeletal diseases respectively, attributable to exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors to inform the development of the WHO/ILO joint methodology., Objectives: We aim to systematically review studies on exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors (Systematic Review 1) and systematically review and meta-analyze estimates of the effect of exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors on osteoarthritis of the hip or knee, and selected other musculoskeletal diseases respectively (Systematic Review 2), applying the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology as an organizing framework, conducting both systematic reviews in tandem and in a harmonized way., Data Sources: Separately for Systematic Reviews 1 and 2, we will search electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and CISDOC. We will also search electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-search reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consult additional experts., Study Eligibility and Criteria: We will include working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State, but exclude children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. The included occupational ergonomic risk factors will be any exposure to one or more of: force exertion; demanding posture; repetitiveness; hand-arm vibration; lifting; kneeling and/or squatting; and climbing. Included outcomes will be (i) osteoarthritis and (ii) other musculoskeletal diseases (i.e., one or more of: rotator cuff syndrome; bicipital tendinitis; calcific tendinitis; shoulder impingement; bursitis shoulder; epicondylitis medialis; epicondylitis lateralis; bursitis elbow; bursitis hip; chondromalacia patellae; meniscus disorders; and/or bursitis knee). For Systematic Review 1, we will include quantitative prevalence studies of any exposure to occupational ergonomic risk factors stratified by country, gender, age and industrial sector or occupation. For Systematic Review 2, we will include randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control-studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the relative effect of any exposure with occupational ergonomic risk factors on the prevalence or incidence of osteoarthritis and/or selected musculoskeletal diseases, compared with the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (i.e., no exposure)., Study Appraisal and Synthesis Methods: At least two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. At least two review authors will assess risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the most suited tools currently available. For Systematic Review 2, if feasible, we will combine relative risks using meta-analysis. We will report results using the guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting (GATHER) for Systematic Review 1 and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines (PRISMA) for Systematic Review 2. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018102631., (Copyright © 2018 World Health Organization and International Labour Organization. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Work-related psychosocial hazards have substantial effects on risks of both musculoskeletal and mental health disorders (MSDs, MHDs). Recent Australian research on workplace risk management practices in 19 work organisations found that risks from work-related psychosocial hazards were poorly managed. This study identified factors impeding better management of MSD and MHD risks within those organisations. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with staff from residential aged care and logistics/transport organisations in Australia. Transcripts were analysed using a worker-centred systems framework. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Many barriers to more effective risk management were identified. Most fundamentally, few people knew of the need to manage MSD risk arising from work-related psychosocial hazards, and OHS-related skills of key managers were often reported as inadequate, particularly concerning management of risk from psychosocial hazards. Also, funding and staffing levels were often reported as problematic, and OHS issues were seen as lower priority than accreditation and commercial requirements., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Musculoskeletal pain in more than one body region is common and a barrier to sustaining employment. We aimed to examine whether work characteristics predict the development of multi-site pain (MSP), and to determine differences in work-related predictors between age groups., Methods: This study is based on 5136 employees from the Study on Transitions in Employment, Ability and Motivation (STREAM) who reported no MSP at baseline. Measures included physical, emotional, mental, and psychological job demands, social support and autonomy. Predictors of MSP were studied by logistic regression analyses. Univariate and multivariate analyses with age stratification (45-49, 50-54, 55-59, and 60-64 years) were done to explore differences between age groups., Results: All work characteristics with the exception of autonomy were predictive of the development of MSP, with odds ratios varying from 1.21 (95% CI 1.04-1.40) for mental job demands to 1.63 (95% CI 1.43-1.86) for physical job demands. No clear pattern of age-related differences in the predictors of MSP emerged, with the exception of social support, which was predictive of MSP developing in all age groups except for the age group 60-64 years., Conclusions: Adverse physical and psychosocial work characteristics are associated with MSP. Organisations need to comprehensively assess work environments to ensure that all relevant workplace hazards, physical and psychosocial, are identified and then controlled for across all age groups.

Objective: To investigate the developmental pathways of multisite musculoskeletal pain (MSP) and the effect of physical and psychosocial working conditions on the development of MSP trajectories., Methods: The study was conducted among food industry workers (N=868) using a longitudinal design. Surveys were conducted every 2 years from 2003 to 2009. The questionnaire covered MSP, physical and psychosocial working conditions (physical strain, environmental factors, repetitive movements, awkward postures; mental strain, team support, leadership, possibility to influence) and work ability. MSP as an outcome was defined as the number of painful areas of the body on a scale of 0-4. Latent class growth modelling and multinomial logistic regression were used to analyse the impact of working conditions on MSP pathways., Results: Five MSP trajectories (no MSP 35.6%, persistent MSP 28.8%, developing MSP 8.8%, increasing MSP 15.3% and decreasing MSP 11.5%) were identified. In a multivariable model, the no MSP pathway was set as the reference group. High physical strain (OR 3.26, 95% CI 2.10 to 5.04), poor environmental factors (3.84, 2.48 to 5.94), high repetitive movements (3.68, 2.31 to 5.88) and high mental strain (3.87, 2.53 to 5.92) at baseline predicted the persistent MSP pathway, allowing for poor work ability (2.81, 1.84 to 4.28) and female gender (1.80, 1.14 to 2.83). High physical strain and female gender predicted the developing MSP pathway. High physical strain, poor environmental factors and high repetitive movements predicted the increasing and decreasing MSP pathways., Conclusions: A substantial proportion of individuals reported having persistent MSP, and one-third reported changing patterns of pain. Adverse physical working conditions and mental strain were strongly associated with having high but stable levels of MSP., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Background: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a major workplace issue. With increasing pressure to extend working lives, predictors of MSD risk across all age groups require accurate identification to inform risk reduction strategies., Methods: In 2005 and 2009, a survey was conducted in a Finnish food processing company (N = 734). Data on workplace physical and psychosocial hazards, work ability, job satisfaction and lifestyle-related variables were collected, and MSD risk was measured through assessment of work-related strain in four body areas. Predictors of MSD risk across three age groups (20-35, 36-49, 50+) were assessed with linear regression analysis., Results: Physical hazards and MSD risk were related differently for each age group. The relationship between psychosocial hazards and MSD risk was less clear. For younger workers, physical hazards were not associated with MSD risk. In contrast, for those aged 36-49, repetitive movements (B = 1.76, p < 0.001) and awkward postures (B = 1.30, p = 0.02) were associated with increased MSD risk. For older workers, environmental hazards were positively associated with MSD risk (B = 0.37, p = 0.04). Predictors of MSD risk changed differently for each age group during 4 years of follow-up. For younger workers, change in environment and repetitive movements, for middle age team support and for older workers change in awkward posture were significant predictors of MSD risk., Conclusions: These results support the need for workplace-specific hazard surveillance data. This will ensure that all contributing factors to MSD risk can be accurately identified and controlled independent of age.

Work related musculoskeletal disorders remain an intractable OHS problem. In 2002, Haslam proposed applying the stage of change model to target ergonomics interventions and other health and safety prevention activities. The stage of change model proposes that taking into account an individual's readiness for change in developing intervention strategies is likely to improve uptake and success. This paper revisits Haslam's proposal in the context of interventions to reduce musculoskeletal disorders. Effective MSD interventions require a systematic approach and need to take into account a combination of measures. Research evidence suggests that in practice, those charged with the management of MSDs are not consistently adopting such an approach. Consequently, intervention development may not represent contemporary best practice. We propose a potential method of addressing this gap is the stage of change model, and use a case study to illustrate this argument in tailoring intervention development for managing MSDs., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are a major occupational health issue for workers in developed and developing countries, including Malaysia. Most research related to MSDs has been undertaken in developed countries; given the different regulatory and cultural practices it is plausible that contributions of hazard and risk factors may be different. A population of Malaysian public service office workers were surveyed (N = 417, 65.5% response rate) to determine prevalence and associated predictors of MSD discomfort. The 6-month period prevalence of MSD discomfort was 92.8% (95%CI = 90.2-95.2%). Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC) analyses was used to compare a range of models and determine a model of best fit. Contributions associated with MSD discomfort in the final model consisted of physical demands (61%), workload (14%), gender (13%), work-home balance (9%) and psychosocial factors (3%). Factors associated with MSD discomfort were similar in developed and developing countries but the relative contribution of factors was different, providing insight into future development of risk management strategies., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd and The Ergonomics Society. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Workstyle can be defined as an individual pattern of cognitions, behaviours and physiological reactivity that can occur while performing job tasks. Workstyle has been associated with the development of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) amongst office workers in developed countries. However, little is known about the contribution of workstyle on MSDs in developing countries such as Malaysia. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to examine the relationship between workstyle and musculoskeletal discomfort in a sample of office workers in Malaysia., Methods: Office workers (N = 417; response rate 65.5 %) from four organisations completed a survey measuring physical and psychosocial hazards, job satisfaction, work-life balance, workstyle, and MSD discomfort levels. Hierarchical regression analyses were undertaken to examine predictors associated with self-reported musculoskeletal discomfort, and more specifically the relationship between workstyle and MSD discomfort., Results: Musculoskeletal discomfort was significantly associated with working through pain, mental health, physical demands, gender and work-life balance (R (2) = 50.2, adjusted R (2) = 0.48; F (13, 324) = 25.09, p = 0.001). Working through pain is the strongest risk factor associated with MSD discomfort (ß = 0.49, p = 0.001) compared to other potential risk factors., Conclusions: Working through pain is influenced by work, social culture and religious beliefs. Workplace MSDs interventions that focus on the impact of physical and psychosocial hazards with emphasis on addressing adverse workstyles should take into account aspects related to work and social culture of the target population. Changes are recommended at both employee and management levels such as better communications and understanding concerning workplace problems with regards to minimizing MSDs at work.

Background: Exposures to occupational hazards substantially increase workers' risk of developing musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and can exacerbate pre-existing disorders. The effects on MSD risk of the physical requirements of work performance are well recognised, but there is now ample evidence that work-related psychosocial hazards can also have substantial effects; further, some hazards may be additive or interactive. This evidence is not reflected in current workplace risk management practices., Discussion: Barriers to more effective workplace management of MSD risk include: the widespread belief that risk arises largely or entirely from physical hazard exposures; regulatory and guidance documents targeting MSDs, most of which reflect this belief; risk assessment tools that focus narrowly on subsets of mainly physical hazards and yet generate outputs in the form of MSD risk indicators; and the conventional occupational health and safety (OHS) risk management paradigm, which is ill-suited to manage MSD risk. It is argued that improved workplace management of MSD risk requires a systems-based management framework and more holistic risk assessment and control procedures that address risk from all types of hazard together rather than in isolation from each other, and that support participation by workers themselves. New MSD risk management tools are needed to meet these requirements. Further, successful implementation of such changes is likely to require some restructuring of workplace responsibilities for MSD risk management. Line managers and supervisors often play key roles in generating hazards, both physical and psychosocial, so there is a need for their more active participation, along with OHS personnel and workers themselves, in routine risk assessment and control procedures. MSDs are one of our largest OHS problems, but workplace risk management procedures do not reflect current evidence concerning their work-related causes. Inadequate attention is given to assessing and controlling risk from psychosocial hazards, and the conventional risk management paradigm focuses too narrowly on risk from individual hazards rather than promoting the more holistic approach needed to manage the combined effects of all relevant hazards. Achievement of such changes requires new MSD risk management tools and better integration of the roles of OHS personnel with those of line managers.

This study of selected jobs in the health care sector explored a range of physical and psychosocial factors to identify those that most strongly predicted work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) risk. A self-report survey was used to collect data on physical and psychosocial risk factors from employees in three health care organisations in Victoria, Australia. Multivariate analyses demonstrated the importance of both psychosocial and physical hazards in predicting WMSD risk and provides evidence for risk management of WMSDs to incorporate a more comprehensive and integrated approach. Use of a risk management toolkit is recommended to address WMSD risk in the workplace., (Crown Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The focus of OHS in Australia is on workplace-based prevention rather than individual health care. Over the past decade, workers' compensation data have shown continuous improvement in work-related deaths, serious injuries and diseases. Injuries from work-related vehicle incidents are the leading cause of fatalities. There is a high incidence of on-road incidents in light vehicles; this problem is under-recognised, and better incidence data are required to support more effective interventions. Rates of many long-latency diseases such as cancers are underestimated, and again more reliable information is needed, particularly on work-related exposures to carcinogens. Disease-related deaths are largely confined to older workers. Musculoskeletal injuries and disorders are the most frequent and costly OHS problem, constituting a large majority of non-fatal injuries and diseases. There is growing recognition that their risk management should be more evidence based, integrating assessment and control of psychosocial and 'manual handling' hazards. A high rate of population ageing is increasing risk of chronic diseases, including musculoskeletal disorders, which is helping to raise awareness of the importance of protecting and promoting workforce health. Strategies to achieve this have been developed but implementation is at an early stage.