Dataset Information

Validity of the dictionary of occupational titles for assessing upper extremity work demands.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) is used in vocational rehabilitation to guide decisions about the ability of a person with activity limitations to perform activities at work. The DOT has categorized physical work demands in five categories. The validity of this categorization is unknown. Aim of this study was to investigate whether the DOT could be used validly to guide decisions for patients with injuries to the upper extremities. Four hypotheses were tested.

Methods

A database including 701 healthy workers was used. All subjects filled out the Dutch Musculoskeletal Questionnaire, from which an Upper Extremity Work Demands score (UEWD) was derived. First, relation between the DOT-categories and UEWD-score was analysed using Spearman correlations. Second, variance of the UEWD-score in occupational groups was tested by visually inspecting boxplots and assessing kurtosis of the distribution. Third, it was investigated whether occupations classified in one DOT-category, could significantly differ on UEWD-scores. Fourth, it was investigated whether occupations in different DOT-categories could have similar UEWD-scores using Mann Whitney U-tests (MWU).

Results

Relation between the DOT-categories and the UEWD-score was weak (r(sp)?=?0.40; p<.01). Overlap between categories was found. Kurtosis exceeded ±1.0 in 3 occupational groups, indicating large variance. UEWD-scores were significantly different within one DOT-category (MWU?=?1.500; p<.001). UEWD scores between DOT-categories were not significantly different (MWU?=?203.000; p?=?.49).

Conclusion

All four hypotheses could not be rejected. The DOT appears to be invalid for assessing upper extremity work demands.

SUBMITTER: Opsteegh L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2997074 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validity of the dictionary of occupational titles for assessing upper extremity work demands.

Opsteegh Lonneke L Soer Remko R Reinders-Messelink Heleen A HA Reneman Michiel F MF van der Sluis Corry K CK

PloS one 20101203 12

<h4>Objectives</h4>The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) is used in vocational rehabilitation to guide decisions about the ability of a person with activity limitations to perform activities at work. The DOT has categorized physical work demands in five categories. The validity of this categorization is unknown. Aim of this study was to investigate whether the DOT could be used validly to guide decisions for patients with injuries to the upper extremities. Four hypotheses were tested.<h4>M ...[more]

PMID: 21151934

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUpper extremity musculoskeletal disorders negatively affect ability to perform activities of daily living, self-care and work. Therefore, outcome measurements that address muscle strength, fatigue resistance, functionality and work physical capacity must be defined to assess and plan specific actions to minimize them.ObjectiveTo investigate the association of upper extremity muscle strength with upper extremity fatigue resistance, work ability and upper extremity dysfunction in a sample of workers from a tertiary hospital.MethodsShoulder and elbow isokinetic strength were assessed by Biodex System 4™, isometric hand grip by JAMAR™, upper extremity fatigue resistance by Functional Impairment Test Hand and Neck/Shoulder/Arm (FIT-HaNSA), ability to work by the Work Ability Index and upper extremity dysfunction by the Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand QuickDASH-Br questionnaire. The Nordic questionnaire and Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were used for pain description. The associations were analysed by Spearman's correlation coefficient (rho) (p < 0.05).ResultsTwenty-seven participants: 59.2% women; mean age 46 years old; 70.3% obese/overweight; 62.9% active with predominantly dynamic muscle contraction work. Besides predominance of good to moderate work ability (81.4%) and comorbidities (37%), all participants had symptoms of the upper extremities for at least 12 months, with a predominance of low-intensity in the shoulder (55.5%). In addition, 88.8% reported pain in other segments. Muscle strength of abduction (rho = 0.49), adduction (rho = 0.40), internal rotation (rho = 0.44) and hand grip (rho = 0.68) presented moderate correlation with FIT-HaNSA. Hand grip (rho = - 0.52) showed moderate correlation with upper extremity dysfunction.ConclusionsThe results of this preliminary study suggested the association of shoulder strength with fatigue resistance. Also, hand grip strength was associated with upper extremity dysfunction and fatigue resistance. No association was found with the Work Ability Index in this sample. So, it is suggested that hand grip and shoulder strength could be outcome measurements used for future interventions focused on upper extremity preventive exercises to improve strength and fatigue resistance of workers at risk for the development of musculoskeletal disorders. Other individual, psychosocial and organizational risk factors must also be considered as influences on upper extremity function.

Project description:ImportanceNew treatments for upper-limb amputation aim to improve movement quality and reduce visual attention to the prosthesis. However, evaluation is limited by a lack of understanding of the essential features of human-prosthesis behavior and by an absence of consistent task protocols.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether task selection is a factor in visuomotor adaptations by prosthesis users to accomplish 2 tasks easily performed by individuals with normal arm function.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study was conducted in a single research center at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Upper-extremity prosthesis users were recruited from January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016, and individuals with normal arm function were recruited from October 1, 2015, through November 30, 2015. Eight prosthesis users and 16 participants with normal arm function were asked to perform 2 goal-directed tasks with synchronized motion capture and eye tracking. Data analysis was performed from December 3, 2018, to April 15, 2019.Main outcome and measuresMovement time, eye fixation, and range of motion of the upper body during 2 object transfer tasks (cup and box) were the main outcomes.ResultsA convenience sample comprised 8 male prosthesis users with acquired amputation (mean [range] age, 45 [30-64] years), along with 16 participants with normal arm function (8 [50%] of whom were men; mean [range] age, 26 [18-43] years; mean [range] height, 172.3 [158.0-186.0] cm; all right handed). Prosthesis users spent a disproportionately prolonged mean (SD) time in grasp and release phases when handling the cups (grasp: 2.0 [2.3] seconds vs 0.9 [0.8] seconds; P < .001; release: 1.1 [0.6] seconds vs 0.7 [0.4] seconds; P < .001). Prosthesis users also had increased mean (SD) visual fixations on the hand for the cup compared with the box task during reach (10.2% [12.1%] vs 2.2% [2.8%]) and transport (37.1% [9.7%] vs 22.3% [7.6%]). Fixations on the hand for both tasks were significantly greater for prosthesis users compared with normative values. Prosthesis users had significantly more trunk flexion and extension for the box task compared with the cup task (mean [SD] trunk range of motion, 32.1 [10.7] degrees vs 21.2 [3.7] degrees; P = .01), with all trunk motions greater than normative values. The box task required greater shoulder movements compared with the cup task for prosthesis users (mean [SD] flexion and extension; 51.3 [12.6] degrees vs 41.0 [9.4] degrees, P = .01; abduction and adduction: 40.5 [7.2] degrees vs 32.3 [5.1] degrees, P = .02; rotation: 50.6 [15.7] degrees vs 35.5 [10.0] degrees, P = .02). However, other than shoulder abduction and adduction for the box task, these values were less than those seen for participants with normal arm function.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that prosthesis users have an inherently different way of adapting to varying task demands, therefore suggesting that task selection is crucial in evaluating visuomotor performance. The cup task required greater compensatory visual fixations and prolonged grasp and release movements, and the box task required specific kinematic compensatory strategies as well as increased visual fixation. This is the first study to date to examine visuomotor differences in prosthesis users across varying task demands, and the findings appear to highlight the advantages of quantitative assessment in understanding human-prosthesis interaction.

Project description:Accelerometers have been used to capture real-world use of the paretic upper extremity in people with stroke. It may be possible to characterize different aspects of the recorded acceleration to gain insight about movement capabilities during task-specific behavior. These measures may be of value for guiding rehabilitation. We undertook a study to identify the acceleration characteristics that have a stable association with upper extremity function and sensitivity to within-participant fluctuations in function over multiple sessions of task-specific training.Twenty-seven adults 6 months or more poststroke with upper extremity paresis participated. Signals from wrist-worn accelerometers were sampled at 30 Hz during 7 sessions of task-specific training. Paretic upper extremity function was evaluated with the Action Research Arm Test. We used Spearman correlations to examine within-session associations between acceleration metrics and Action Research Arm Test performance. A mixed model was used to determine which metrics were sensitive to within-participant fluctuations in upper extremity function across the 7 training sessions.Upper extremity function correlated with bilateral acceleration variability and use ratio during 5 and 6 sessions, respectively. Time accelerating between 76% and 100% of peak acceleration correlated with function in 6 sessions. Variability of the paretic upper extremity acceleration and the ratio of acceleration variability between upper extremities were associated with function during all 7 sessions. Variability in both the acceleration of the paretic upper extremity, and acceleration of the paretic and nonparetic extremities combined were sensitive to within-participant fluctuations in function across training sessions.Multiple features of the acceleration profile track with upper extremity function within and across sessions of task-specific training. It may be possible to monitor these features with accelerometers to index upper extremity function outside of clinical settings.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A91).

Dataset Information

Validity of the dictionary of occupational titles for assessing upper extremity work demands.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Validity of the dictionary of occupational titles for assessing upper extremity work demands.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets