Back to Search Start Over

Biomechanical constraints remain major risk factors for low back pain. Results from a prospective cohort study in French male employees

Authors :
Yves Roquelaure
Catherine Ha
Aline Ramond-Roquin
Elsa Parot-Schinkel
Julie Bodin
Natacha Fouquet
Céline Sérazin
Audrey Petit Le Manac'h
Isabelle Richard
Laboratoire d'Ergonomie et d'Épidémiologie en Santé au Travail (LEEST)
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers (CHU Angers)
PRES Université Nantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM)-PRES Université Nantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM)-Université d'Angers (UA)-Institut de Veille Sanitaire (INVS)
Université d'Angers - Faculté de médecine (UA UFR Médecine)
Université d'Angers (UA)-Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers (CHU Angers)
PRES Université Nantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM)-PRES Université Nantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM)
PRES Université Nantes Angers Le Mans (UNAM)
Source :
Spine Journal, Spine Journal, 2015, 15 (4), pp.559-69. ⟨10.1016/j.spinee.2013.05.040⟩
Publication Year :
2011

Abstract

International audience; BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Low back pain (LBP) is a major public health problem, with a considerable impact on workers.PURPOSE: To model the risk of LBP in the male general working population.STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Repeated cross-sectional surveys in a wide occupational setting.PATIENT SAMPLE: A random sample of 2,161 men working in various occupations in a French region participated in a first survey in 2002, and 1,313 of these (60.8%) participated in a second survey in2007.OUTCOME MEASURE: The self-reported prevalence of LBP during the previous week in the second survey.METHODS: Twenty-one biomechanical, organizational, psychosocial, and individual factors were assessed in the first survey. The association between these potential risk factors and the prevalence of later LBP (in the second survey) was studied, using multistep logistic regression models.RESULTS: Three hundred ninety-four men reported LBP in the second survey (prevalence 30.0%). The final multivariate model highlighted four risk factors: frequent bending (odds ratio [OR], 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-1.97 for bending forward only; and OR, 2.13, 95% CI, 1.52-3.00 for bending both forward and sideways), driving industrial vehicles (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.00-1.81), working more hours than officially planned (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.05-1.81), and reported low support from supervisors (OR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.02-1.79).CONCLUSIONS: These results emphasize that biomechanical factors remain worth considering, even when psychosocial factors are taken into account, and provide a significant contribution to preventive strategies.

Details

ISSN :
18781632
Volume :
15
Issue :
4
Database :
OpenAIRE
Journal :
The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society
Accession number :
edsair.doi.dedup.....0f1be0c16d34b3cba8f6166e812d0b9a