BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are the most common cause of disability in many industrial countries. Recurrent and chronic pain accounts for a substantial portion of workers' absenteeism. Neck pain seems to be more prominent in the general population than previously known.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of workplace interventions (WIs) in adult workers with neck pain.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3), and MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, OTseeker, PEDro to July 2009, with no language limitations;screened reference lists; and contacted experts in the field.  
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), in which at least 50% of the participants had neck pain at baseline and received interventions conducted at the workplace.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing information. Since the interventions varied to a large extend, International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) terminology was used to classify the intervention components. This heterogeneity restricted pooling of data to only one meta-analysis of two studies.
MAIN RESULTS: We identified 1995 references and included10 RCTs (2745 workers). Two studies were assessed with low risk of bias. Most trials (N = 8) examined office workers. Few workers were sick-listed. Thus, WIs were seldom designed to improve return-to-work. Overall, there was low quality evidence that showed no significant differences between WIs and no intervention for pain prevalence or severity. If present, significant results in favour of WIs were not sustained across follow-up times. There was moderate quality evidence (1 study, 415 workers) that a four-component WI was significantly more effective in reducing sick leave in the intermediate-term (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.95), but not in the short- (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.34) or long-term (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.26). These findings might be because only a small proportion of the workers were sick-listed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this review found low quality evidence that neither supported nor refuted the benefits of any specific WI for pain relief and moderate quality evidence that a multiple-component intervention reduced sickness absence in the intermediate-term, which was not sustained over time. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. There is an urgent need for high quality RCTs with well designed WIs.
PURPOSE: Long-term sickness absence among workers is a major problem in industrialised countries. The aim of the review is to determine whether interventions involving the workplace are more effective and cost-effective at helping employees on sick leave return to work than those that do not involve the workplace at all. METHODS: A systematic review of controlled intervention studies and economic evaluations. Sixteen electronic databases and grey literature sources were searched, and reference and citation tracking was performed on included publications. A narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: Ten articles were found reporting nine trials from Europe and Canada, and four articles were found evaluating the cost-effectiveness of interventions. The population in eight trials suffered from back pain and related musculoskeletal conditions. Interventions involving employees, health practitioners and employers working together, to implement work modifications for the absentee, were more consistently effective than other interventions. Early intervention was also found to be effective. The majority of trials were of good or moderate quality. Economic evaluations indicated that interventions with a workplace component are likely to be more cost effective than those without. CONCLUSION: Stakeholder participation and work modification are more effective and cost effective at returning to work adults with musculoskeletal conditions than other workplace-linked interventions, including exercise.
The objective of the review was to gain more insight into the effects of occupational interventions for primary prevention of musculoskeletal symptoms in healthcare workers. The Cochrane Collaboration methodological guidelines for systematic reviews functioned as a starting point. Thirteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria were analysed for methodological quality and effects. Eight outcome effect areas were established and defined as areas in which an effect had been determined in at least two studies. A method based on levels of scientific evidence was then used to synthesize the information available. Strong scientific evidence for the beneficial effect of occupational interventions was found for the outcome effect areas physical discomfort, technical performance of transfers and frequency of manual lifting. Insufficient evidence was found for the effect areas absenteeism due to musculoskeletal problems, musculoskeletal symptoms, fatigue, perceived physical load and knowledge of risk factors at work and ergonomic principles. Training and education combined with an ergonomic intervention were found to be effective.
The aim of this report is to review the extant literature, in order to determine the extent to which effectively managing some or all of the six key sources of occupational stress, specified in the Management Standards, is associated with beneficial business outcomes. These six stressors, or working conditions, are demands, control, support, relationships, role, and change. The results of meta-analyses and literature reviews lead to the conclusion that there is at least some high quality evidence of a business case for each stressor area, although the case is stronger for some working conditions. Evidence is greatest for control, where even intervention studies show that targeted lowimpact change programmes, which essentially applied the Management Standard of control, have significant, and very meaningful, effects on business outcomes. The business case appears weakest for demands. In particular, high demands only have meaningful and consistent deleterious effects on business outcomes in laboratory experiments. In actual work organisations, high demands are not a good predictor of any business outcome, except when they are accompanied by lower levels of control.
INTRODUCTION: A systematic review was conducted to review the effectiveness of workplace-based return-to-work (RTW) interventions. METHOD: Seven databases were searched, in English and French, between January 1990 and December 2003 for peer-reviewed studies of RTW interventions provided at the workplace to workers with work disability associated with musculoskeletal or other pain-related conditions. Methodological quality appraisal and data extraction were conducted by pairs of reviewers. RESULTS: Of a total of 4124 papers identified by the search, 10 studies were of sufficient quality to be included in the review. There was strong evidence that work disability duration is significantly reduced by work accommodation offers and contact between healthcare provider and workplace; and moderate evidence that it is reduced by interventions which include early contact with worker by workplace, ergonomic work site visits, and presence of a RTW coordinator. For these five intervention components, there was moderate evidence that they reduce costs associated with work disability duration. Evidence for sustainability of these effects was insufficient or limited. Evidence regarding the impact of supernumerary replacements was insufficient. Evidence levels regarding the impact of the intervention components on quality-of-life was insufficient or mixed. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review provides the evidence base supporting that workplace-based RTW interventions can reduce work disability duration and associated costs, however the evidence regarding their impact on quality-of-life outcomes was much weaker.
A systematic review of randomised controlled trials was undertaken to evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions to prevent low back pain. Potential trials were located by a computerised search supplemented with citation tracking. The methodological quality of the trials was assessed on 11 criteria and the level of evidence for each intervention was determined, based upon the amount, consistency and quality of evidence from the trials. The review located 13 trials that were generally of moderate quality. The trials suggest that workplace exercise is effective, braces and education are ineffective, and workplace modification plus education is of unknown value in preventing low back pain.
Musculoskeletal disorders are the most common cause of disability in many industrial countries. Recurrent and chronic pain accounts for a substantial portion of workers' absenteeism. Neck pain seems to be more prominent in the general population than previously known.
OBJECTIVES:
To determine the effectiveness of workplace interventions (WIs) in adult workers with neck pain.
SEARCH METHODS:
We searched: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2009, issue 3), and MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ISI Web of Science, OTseeker, PEDro to July 2009, with no language limitations;screened reference lists; and contacted experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA:
We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), in which at least 50% of the participants had neck pain at baseline and received interventions conducted at the workplace.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Authors were contacted for missing information. Since the interventions varied to a large extend, International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) terminology was used to classify the intervention components. This heterogeneity restricted pooling of data to only one meta-analysis of two studies.
MAIN RESULTS:
We identified 1995 references and included10 RCTs (2745 workers). Two studies were assessed with low risk of bias. Most trials (N = 8) examined office workers. Few workers were sick-listed. Thus, WIs were seldom designed to improve return-to-work. Overall, there was low quality evidence that showed no significant differences between WIs and no intervention for pain prevalence or severity. If present, significant results in favour of WIs were not sustained across follow-up times. There was moderate quality evidence (1 study, 415 workers) that a four-component WI was significantly more effective in reducing sick leave in the intermediate-term (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.95), but not in the short- (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.34) or long-term (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.26). These findings might be because only a small proportion of the workers were sick-listed.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:
Overall, this review found low quality evidence that neither supported nor refuted the benefits of any specific WI for pain relief and moderate quality evidence that a multiple-component intervention reduced sickness absence in the intermediate-term, which was not sustained over time. Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. There is an urgent need for high quality RCTs with well designed WIs.
Systematic Review Question»Systematic review of interventions
