Dataset Information

Effect of workplace- versus home-based physical exercise on pain in healthcare workers: study protocol for a single blinded cluster randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: 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).

SUBMITTER: Jakobsen MD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3991922 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of workplace- versus home-based physical exercise on pain in healthcare workers: study protocol for a single blinded cluster randomized controlled trial.

Jakobsen Markus D MD Sundstrup Emil E Brandt Mikkel M Kristensen Anne Zoëga AZ Jay Kenneth K Stelter Reinhard R Lavendt Ebbe E Aagaard Per P Andersen Lars L LL

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20140407

<h4>Background</h4>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 ...[more]

PMID: 24708570

Similar Datasets

Project description:While workplace physical exercise can help manage musculoskeletal disorders, less is known about psychosocial effects of such interventions. This aim of this study was to investigate the effect of workplace physical exercise on psychosocial factors among workers with chronic musculoskeletal pain.The trial design was a 2-armed parallel-group randomized controlled trial with allocation concealment. A total of 66 slaughterhouse workers (51 men and 15 women, mean age 45 years [standard deviation (SD) 10]) with upper limb chronic musculoskeletal pain were randomly allocated to group-based strength training (physical exercise group) or individual ergonomic training and education (reference group) for 10 weeks. Social climate was assessed with the General Nordic Questionnaire for Psychological and Social Factors at Work, and vitality and mental health were assessed with the 36-item Short Form Health Survey. All scales were converted to 0 to 100 (higher scores are better). Between-group differences from baseline to follow-up were determined using linear mixed models adjusted for workplace, age, gender, and baseline values of the outcome.Mean baseline scores of social climate, mental health, and vitality were 52.2 (SD 14.9), 79.5 (SD 13.7), and 53.9 (SD 19.7), respectively. Complete baseline and follow-up data were obtained from 30 and 31 from the physical exercise and reference groups, respectively. The between-group differences from baseline to follow-up between physical exercise and reference were 7.6 (95% CI 0.3 to 14.9), -2.3 (95% CI -10.3 to 5.8), and 10.1 (95% CI 0.6 to 19.5) for social climate, mental health, and vitality, respectively. For social climate and vitality, this corresponded to moderate effect sizes (Cohen d?=?0.51 for both) in favor of physical exercise. There were no reported adverse events.In conclusion, workplace physical exercise performed together with colleagues improves social climate and vitality among workers with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Mental health remained unchanged.

Project description:BackgroundNeck pain is prevalent among office workers. This study evaluated the impact of an ergonomic and exercise training (EET) intervention and an ergonomic and health promotion (EHP) intervention on neck pain intensity among the All Workers and a subgroup of Neck Pain cases at baseline.MethodsA 12-month cluster-randomized trial was conducted in 14 public and private organisations. Office workers aged ≥18 years working ≥30 h per week (n = 740) received an individualised workstation ergonomic intervention, followed by 1:1 allocation to the EET group (neck-specific exercise training), or the EHP group (health promotion) for 12 weeks. Neck pain intensity (scale: 0-9) was recorded at baseline, 12 weeks, and 12 months. Participants with data at these three time points were included for analysis (n = 367). Intervention group differences were analysed using generalized estimating equation models on an intention-to-treat basis and adjusted for potential confounders. Subgroup analysis was performed on neck cases reporting pain ≥3 at baseline (n = 96).ResultsThe EET group demonstrated significantly greater reductions in neck pain intensity at 12 weeks compared to the EHP group for All Workers (EET: β = - 0.53 points 95% CI: - 0.84- - 0.22 [36%] and EHP: β = - 0.17 points 95% CI: - 0.47-0.13 [10.5%], p-value = 0.02) and the Neck Cases (EET: β = - 2.32 points 95% CI: - 3.09- - 1.56 [53%] and EHP: β = - 1.75 points 95% CI: - 2.35- - 1.16 [36%], p = 0.04). Reductions in pain intensity were not maintained at 12 months with no between-group differences observed in All Workers (EET: β = - 0.18, 95% CI: - 0.53-0.16 and EHP: β = - 0.14 points 95% CI: - 0.49-0.21, p = 0.53) or Neck Cases, although in both groups an overall reduction was found (EET: β = - 1.61 points 95% CI: - 2.36- - 0.89 and EHP: β = - 1.9 points 95% CI: - 2.59- - 1.20, p = 0.26).ConclusionEET was more effective than EHP in reducing neck pain intensity in All Workers and Neck Cases immediately following the intervention period (12 weeks) but not at 12 months, with changes at 12 weeks reaching clinically meaningful thresholds for the Neck Cases. Findings suggest the need for continuation of exercise to maintain benefits in the longer term.Clinical trial registrationhACTRN12612001154897 Date of Registration: 31/10/2012.

Project description:BACKGROUND:This study uses the RE-AIM framework to provide a process evaluation of a workplace-based cluster randomised trial comparing an ergonomic plus exercise intervention to an ergonomic plus health promotion intervention; and to highlight variations across organisations; and consider the implications of the findings for intervention translation. METHOD:This study applied the RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) methodology to examine the interventions' implementation and to explore the extent to which differences between participating organisations contributed to the variations in findings. Qualitative and quantitative data collected from individual participants, research team observations and organisations were interrogated to report on the five RE-AIM domains. RESULTS:Overall reach was 22.7% but varied across organisations (range 9 to 83%). Participants were generally representative of the recruitment pool though more females (n?=?452 or 59%) were recruited than were in the pool (49%). Effectiveness measures (health-related productivity loss and neck pain) varied across all organisations, with no clear pattern emerging to indicate the source of the variation. Organisation-level adoption (66%) and staffing level adoption (91%) were high. The interventions were implemented with minimal protocol variations and high staffing consistency, but organisations varied in their provision of resources (e.g. training space, seniority of liaisons). Mean adherence of participants to the EET intervention was 56% during the intervention period, but varied from 41 to 71% across organisations. At 12?months, 15% of participants reported regular EET adherence. Overall mean (SD) adherence to EHP was 56% (29%) across organisations during the intervention period (range 28 to 77%), with 62% of participants reporting regular adherence at 12?months. No organisations continued the interventions after the follow-up period. CONCLUSION:Although the study protocol was implemented with high consistency and fidelity, variations in four domains (reach, effectiveness, adoption and implementation) arose between the 14 participating organisations. These variations may be the source of mixed effectiveness across organisations. Factors known to increase the success of workplace interventions, such as strong management support, a visible commitment to employee wellbeing and participant engagement in intervention design should be considered and adequately measured for future interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ACTRN12612001154897; 29 October 2012.

Dataset Information

Effect of workplace- versus home-based physical exercise on pain in healthcare workers: study protocol for a single blinded cluster randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Effect of workplace- versus home-based physical exercise on pain in healthcare workers: study protocol for a single blinded cluster randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets