An educational and physical program to reduce headache, neck/shoulder pain in a working community: a cluster-randomized controlled trial.
ABSTRACT: Noninvasive physical management is often prescribed for headache and neck pain. Systematic reviews, however, indicate that the evidence of its efficacy is limited. Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of a workplace educational and physical program in reducing headache and neck/shoulder pain.Cluster-randomized controlled trial. All municipal workers of the City of Turin, Italy, were invited to participate. Those who agreed were randomly assigned, according to their departments, to the intervention group (IG) or to the control group and were given diaries for the daily recording of pain episodes for 1 month (baseline). Subsequently, only the IG (119 departments, 923 workers) began the physical and educational program, whereas the control group (117 departments, 990 workers) did not receive any intervention. All participants were again given diaries for the daily recording of pain episodes after 6 months of intervention. The primary outcome was the change in the frequency of headache (expressed as the proportion of subjects with a ?50% reduction of frequency; responder rate); among the secondary outcomes there were the absolute reduction of the number of days per month with headache and neck/shoulder pain. Differences between the two groups were evaluated using mixed-effect regression models. The IG showed a higher responder rate [risk ratio, 95% confidence interval (CI)] for headache (1.58; 1.28 to 1.92) and for neck/shoulder pain (1.53; 1.27 to 1.82), and a larger reduction of the days per month (95% CI) with headache (-1.72; -2.40 to -1.04) and with neck/shoulder pain (-2.51; -3.56 to -1.47).The program effectively reduced headache and neck/shoulder pain in a large working community and appears to be easily transferable to primary-care settings. Further trials are needed to investigate the program effectiveness in a clinical setting, for highly selected patients suffering from specific headache types.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00551980.
Project description:To investigate the effect of workplace neck/shoulder strength training with and without regular supervision on neck/shoulder pain and headache among office workers.A 20-week cluster randomized controlled trial among 351 office workers was randomized into three groups: two training groups with the same total amount of planned exercises three times per week (1) with supervision (3WS) throughout the intervention period, (2) with minimal supervision (3MS) only initially, and (3) a reference group (REF). Main outcome is self-reported pain intensity in neck and shoulder (scale 0-9) and headache (scale 0-10).Intention-to-treat analyses showed a significant decrease in neck pain intensity the last 7 days in 3MS compared with REF: -0.5 ± 0.2 (P < 0.02) and a tendency for 3WS versus REF: -0.4 ± 0.2 (P < 0.07). Intensity of headache the last month decreased in both training groups: 3WS versus REF: -1.1 ± 0.2 (P < 0.001) and 3MS versus REF: -1.1 ± 0.2 (P < 0.001). Additionally, days of headache decreased 1.0 ± 0.5 in 3WS and 1.3 ± 0.5 in 3MS versus REF. There were no differences between the two training groups for any of the variables.Neck/shoulder training at the workplace reduced neck pain and headache among office workers independently of the extent of supervision. This finding has important practical implications for future workplace interventions.
Project description:AIMS: To investigate the longitudinal relation between physical capacity (isokinetic lifting strength, static endurance of the back, neck, and shoulder muscles, and mobility of the spine) and low back, neck, and shoulder pain. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 1789 Dutch workers participated. At baseline, isokinetic lifting strength, static endurance of the back, neck, and shoulder muscles, and mobility of the spine were measured in the pain free workers, as well as potential confounders, including physical workload. Low back, neck, and shoulder pain were self-reported annually at baseline and three times during follow up. RESULTS: After adjustment for confounders, Poisson generalised estimation equations showed an increased risk of low back pain among workers in the lowest sex specific tertile of performance in the static back endurance tests compared to workers in the reference category (RR = 1.42; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.71), but this was not found for isokinetic trunk lifting strength or mobility of the spine. An increased risk of neck pain was shown for workers with low performance in tests of isokinetic neck/shoulder lifting strength (RR = 1.31; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.67) and static neck endurance (RR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.00 to 1.49). Among workers in the lowest tertiles of isokinetic neck/shoulder lifting strength or endurance of the shoulder muscles, no increased risk of shoulder pain was found. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that low back or neck endurance were independent predictors of low back or neck pain, respectively, and that low lifting neck/shoulder strength was an independent predictor of neck pain. No association was found between lifting trunk strength, or mobility of the spine and the risk of low back pain, nor between lifting neck/shoulder strength or endurance of the shoulder muscles and the risk of shoulder pain.
Project description:Background:Musculoskeletal disorders are highly prevalent among office workers, with strong evidence suggesting that workplace-based resistance training programs can prevent several upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. The aim of the present study was to examine the dose-response relationship between resistance training frequency and pain relief among office workers with neck- and shoulder pain. Methods:Thirty participants with mild to moderate neck- and shoulder pain attended a 16-week intervention starting with an eight-week control period followed by an eight-week training period. After the control period, the participants were randomized into either a 10?min (TG10) or 2?×?10?min (TG2) workplace-based, high-intensity neck- and shoulder specific resistance training program that was executed 5 days per week and consisting of four exercises. The participants were tested pre and post each period for mean and worst pain using the 0-100?mm visual analog scale (VAS), 0-100?mm health-related quality of life and isometric strength of the neck-and shoulder region. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Friedman with Bonferroni post hoc corrections were used to assess differences in between and within groups for the three testing times pre, mid and post intervention. Results:No differences were observed between the groups in any of the variables in the control period (p?=?0.27-0.97) or training period (p?=?0.37-0.68). When merging the two groups, the mean and worst pain was reduced by 25 and 43% (p?=?0.05 and?<?0.01, ES?=?0.41 and 0.55) in the training period in addition to 10.6% increase in health-related quality of life (p?=?0.01, ES?=?0.52). No difference in strength was observed (p?=?0.29-0.85). Conclusion:Daily bouts of specific high-intensity resistance training of the shoulder and neck region at the workplace reduced neck- and shoulder pain and improved quality of life of office workers. However, 10?min bouts were equally effective as 2?×?10?min bouts per day. The authors recommend office workers to perform daily neck- and shoulder resistance training to possibly prevent and/or decrease pain in the neck- and shoulder area. Trial registration:ISRCTN69968888, retrospectively registered (24/09/2019).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Neck and low back pain (LBP) are common in office workers. Exercise trials to reduce neck and LBP conducted in sport sector are lacking. We investigated the effectiveness of the standardised Fustra20Neck&Back exercise program for reducing pain and increasing fitness in office workers with recurrent non-specific neck and/or LBP. METHOD:Volunteers were recruited through newspaper and Facebook. The design is a multi-centre randomised, two-arm, parallel group trial across 34 fitness clubs in Finland. Eligibility was determined by structured telephone interview. Instructors were specially educated professionals. Neuromuscular exercise was individually guided twice weekly for 10 weeks. Webropol survey, and objective measurements of fitness, physical activity, and sedentary behavior were conducted at baseline, and at 3 and 12 months. Mean differences between study groups (Exercise vs Control) were analysed using a general linear mixed model according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS:At least moderate intensity pain (≥40 mm) in both the neck and back was detected in 44% of participants at baseline. Exercise compliance was excellent: 92% participated 15-20 times out of 20 possible. Intensity and frequency of neck pain, and strain in neck/shoulders decreased significantly in the Exercise group compared with the Control group. No differences in LBP and strain were detected. Neck/shoulder and trunk flexibility improved, as did quality of life in terms of pain and physical functioning. CONCLUSIONS:The Fustra20Neck&Back exercise program was effective for reducing neck/shoulder pain and strain, but not LBP. Evidence-based exercise programs of sports clubs have potential to prevent persistent, disabling musculoskeletal problems.
Project description:Modern office workers are often impacted by chronic neck/shoulder pain. Most of the previous studies which investigated the relationship of the occupational factors and musculoskeletal symptoms had adopted questionnaire survey. In this study the microcirculatory characteristics and perceived symptoms in neck/shoulder region were compared among office workers with sedentary lifestyle.Thirty-seven female office workers were recruited in this study. Microcirculatory flow in neck/shoulder region characterized by the mean blood flow (MMBF value), pulsatile blood flow (PMBF value), and the PMBF/MMBF ratio (perfusion pulsatility, PP) were investigated using Laser Doppler Flowmetry (LDF). A Chinese version of the Standardized Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) were also administered to collect the information of perceived neck/shoulder symptoms. Correlations between the perfusion characteristics and the individual/occupational factors were analyzed using the Spearman test. The difference of the MMBF values between the low-pain group (pain level?2) and the high-pain group (pain level>2) were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.There were 81% participants reported neck or shoulder pain symptoms. The duration of shoulder pain was significantly correlated with the workers' age and the duration of employment (p<0.01) (n = 37). While both the MMBF and PMBF values in shoulder region were significantly reduced with the workers' age and the duration of employment (p<0.05) (n = 27). And there was a 54% reduction in the MMBF value of the workers from age of 23 to 47. And the MMBF value of the high-pain group (n = 15) was significantly lower than the value of the low-pain group (n = 15) (p<0.05). The duration of shoulder pain showed a moderately negative correlation with PMBF values (n = 19). Besides, the PP value was moderately correlated with shoulder pain level attributed by the rapid reduction of MMBF values (p = 0.07).In this study, the LDF method was used for the first time in the workplace in Taiwan. It was demonstrated that the MMBF in shoulder region were affected by aging effect and towards lower value at higher pain level. Impaired microcirculation caused by age effect, when coupled with sedentary lifestyle, was found to be more likely to evoke ischemia shoulder pain. Further studies are needed to assess current indicator, PP value, and the underlying mechanism of pain caused by sedentary lifestyle.
Project description:Specific strength training can reduce neck and shoulder pain in office workers, but the optimal combination of exercise frequency and duration remains unknown. This study investigates how one weekly hour of strength training for the neck and shoulder muscles is most effectively distributed.A total of 447 office workers with and without neck and/or shoulder pain were randomly allocated at the cluster-level to one of four groups; 1×60 (1WS), 3×20 (3WS) or 9×7 (9WS) min a week of supervised high-intensity strength training for 20 weeks, or to a reference group without training (REF). Primary outcome was self-reported neck and shoulder pain (scale 0-9) and secondary outcome work disability (Disability in Arms, Shoulders and Hands (DASH)).The intention-to-treat analysis showed reduced neck and right shoulder pain in the training groups after 20 weeks compared with REF. Among those with pain ?3 at baseline (n=256), all three training groups achieved significant reduction in neck pain compared with REF (p<0.01). From a baseline pain rating of 3.2 (SD 2.3) in the neck among neck cases, 1WS experienced a reduction of 1.14 (95% CI 0.17 to 2.10), 3WS 1.88 (0.90 to 2.87) and 9WS 1.35 (0.24 to 2.46) which is considered clinically significant. DASH was reduced in 1WS and 3WS only.One hour of specific strength training effectively reduced neck and shoulder pain in office workers. Although the three contrasting training groups showed no statistical differences in neck pain reduction, only 1WS and 3WS reduced DASH. This study suggests some flexibility regarding time-wise distribution when implementing specific strength training at the workplace.
Project description:The prevalence and consequences of musculoskeletal pain is considerable among healthcare workers, allegedly due to high physical work demands of healthcare work. Previous investigations have shown promising results of physical exercise for relieving pain among different occupational groups, but the question remains whether such physical exercise should be performed at the workplace or conducted as home-based exercise. Performing physical exercise at the workplace together with colleagues may be more motivating for some employees and thus increase adherence. On the other hand, physical exercise performed during working hours at the workplace may be costly for the employers in terms of time spend. Thus, it seems relevant to compare the efficacy of workplace- versus home-based training on musculoskeletal pain. This study is intended to investigate the effect of workplace-based versus home-based physical exercise on musculoskeletal pain among healthcare workers.This study was designed as a cluster randomized controlled trial performed at 3 hospitals in Copenhagen, Denmark. Clusters are hospital departments and hospital units. Cluster randomization was chosen to increase adherence and avoid contamination between interventions. Two hundred healthcare workers from 18 departments located at three different hospitals is allocated to 10 weeks of 1) workplace based physical exercise performed during working hours (using kettlebells, elastic bands and exercise balls) for 5?×?10 minutes per week and up to 5 group-based coaching sessions, or 2) home based physical exercise performed during leisure time (using elastic bands and body weight exercises) for 5?×?10 minutes per week. Both intervention groups will also receive ergonomic instructions on patient handling and use of lifting aides etc. Inclusion criteria are female healthcare workers working at a hospital. Average pain intensity (VAS scale 0-10) of the back, neck and shoulder (primary outcome) and physical exertion during work, social capital and work ability (secondary outcomes) is assessed at baseline and 10-week follow-up. Further, postural balance and mechanical muscle function is assessed during clinical examination at baseline and follow-up.This cluster randomized trial will investigate the change in self-rated average pain intensity in the back, neck and shoulder after either 10 weeks of physical exercise at the workplace or at home.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01921764).
Project description:BACKGROUND:Uncertainties still exist about the role of playing musical instruments on the report of musculoskeletal complaints and headache. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the prevalence of and risk indicators for symptoms of temporomandibular disorders, pain in the neck or shoulder, and headache among musicians. METHODS:A questionnaire was distributed among 50 Dutch music ensembles. RESULTS:The questionnaire was completed by 1470 musicians (response rate 77.0%). Of these, 371 musicians were categorised as woodwind players, 300 as brass players, 276 as upper strings players, 306 as vocalists and 208 as controls; nine musicians had not noted their main instrument. The mean age was 41.6 years (standard deviation [SD] 17.2), and 46.5% were male. Irrespective of instrumentalist group, 18.3% of the musicians reported TMD pain, 52.5% reported pain in the neck and shoulder area, and 42.5% reported headache. Of the functional complaints, 18.3% of the musicians reported TMJ sounds, whereas a jaw lock or catch on opening or on closing was reported by 7.1% and 2.4%, respectively. TMD pain was associated with playing a woodwind instrument, whereas pain in the neck and shoulder was associated with playing the violin or viola. For each complaint, oral behaviours were found as risk indicator, supplemented by specific risk indicators for the various complaints. CONCLUSIONS:The current finding that pain-related symptoms varied widely between instrumentalist groups seems to reflect the impact of different instrument playing techniques. Playing a musical instrument appears not the primary aetiologic factor in precipitating a functional temporomandibular joint problem.
Project description:<h4>Objectives</h4>Our study aimed to investigate the association between comprehensive workstations and neck and upper-limb pain (NUP) among office workers.<h4>Methods</h4>This cross-sectional study included 307 office workers (median age, 39 years; 88% men). Workstations (presence of armrest, armrest position, number of monitors used, mouse position, mouse usage, keyboard usage, and keyboard position) were investigated in terms of 17 items and judged as "adequate" or "inadequate." NUP was assessed using a numerical rating scale. NUP locations included the neck, shoulder, elbow, and wrist. In the statistical analysis, outcome variables were the presence of pain in each part, while explanatory variables were the number of inadequate workstations. Logistic regression analyses were conducted with adjustment for age, gender, working duration, and exercise habit.<h4>Results</h4>The prevalence of neck pain was 47% (n = 143), shoulder pain was 50% (n = 153), elbow pain was 7.2% (n = 22), and wrist pain was 13% (n = 40). In the adjusted model, the number of inadequate workstations had significant positive associations with elbow pain (odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06.1.81) and wrist pain (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 188.8.131.52). However, the number of inadequate workstations was not significantly associated with neck pain or shoulder pain.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Workstation-related factors (presence of armrest, armrest position, mouse usage, and keyboard usage) were significantly associated with elbow and wrist pain. Our findings suggest that workstations can contribute to elbow and wrist pain in office workers.
Project description:INTRODUCTION: The objective of the present study is to describe the extent of productivity loss among computer workers with neck/shoulder symptoms and hand/arm symptoms, and to examine associations between pain intensity, various physical and psychosocial factors and productivity loss in computer workers with neck/shoulder and hand/arm symptoms. METHODS: A cross-sectional design was used. The study population consisted of 654 computer workers with neck/shoulder or hand/arm symptoms from five different companies. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the occurrence of self-reported productivity loss. Logistic regression analyses were used to examine the associations. RESULTS: In 26% of all the cases reporting symptoms, productivity loss was involved, the most often in cases reporting both symptoms (36%). Productivity loss involved sickness absence in 11% of the arm/hand cases, 32% of the neck/shoulder cases and 43% of the cases reporting both symptoms. The multivariate analyses showed statistically significant odds ratios for pain intensity (OR: 1.26; CI: 1.12-1.41), for high effort/no low reward (OR: 2.26; CI: 1.24-4.12), for high effort/low reward (OR: 1.95; CI: 1.09-3.50), and for low job satisfaction (OR: 3.10; CI: 1.44-6.67). Physical activity in leisure time, full-time work and overcommitment were not associated with productivity loss. CONCLUSION: In most computer workers with neck/shoulder symptoms or hand/arm symptoms productivity loss derives from a decreased performance at work and not from sickness absence. Favorable psychosocial work characteristics might prevent productivity loss in symptomatic workers.