School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Appl Ergon. 2010 Jan;41(1):106-14. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.06.006. Epub 2009 Jul 18.
For decades the literature has shown an association between work-related risk factors and back injuries among employees. However, only recently, there is a growing body of literature that suggests lifestyle risk factors may also be associated with back injuries. The purpose of this research was to determine if selected lifestyle risk factors are associated with a greater risk of back injuries. Further, there may be an association between job status and incident reporting, lost workdays cases and workers' compensation (WC) paid for back injuries among university employees. Aggregate data from a Health Risk Assessment (HRA) questionnaire were used to analyze 6053 university employees for lifestyle risk factors associated with back injuries. Of the total sample, 57% (n=3471) were female; 46% (n=2778) worked as clerical or service staff; and the mean age was 45years. Pearson chi-square (chi(2)) analyses indicate that job status (chi(2)=307.07, df=4, p<.001) and gender (chi(2)=40.14, df=2, p<.001) were associated with high risk back score. An ordinal regression analysis predicted that participants who exercised vigorously for at least 20min, 3 or more days per week, or 3 or more days per week of combined vigorous exercise and moderate-intensity physical activity are almost 30 times less likely to have a high back risk score compared to participants who do not exercise vigorously or participate in less than 3days per week of moderate-intensity physical activity (OR=29.68, 95% CI=25-35.25, p<.001). Participants who have a low risk score for BMI are three times less likely (OR=3.20, 95% CI=2.74-3.75, p<.001) to have a high back risk score when compared to participants who have a high risk score for BMI. A regression tree predicted high back risk scores were participants who: (1) receive an adequate amount of physical activity or vigorous exercise and is a male service or clerical staff; (2) do not receive an adequate amount of physical activity or vigorous exercise, and is not overweight; or (3) who do not receive an adequate amount of physical activity or vigorous exercise, and is overweight. Six years of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 300 logs and WC claims data paid for back injuries supported the finding that clerical or service staff had the greatest risk of back injuries. Based on the results of this study, there appears to be an association between lifestyle risk factors, job status and back injuries among university employees. We believe our evaluation approach may be used to study other work populations to verify the outcomes observed in this study.
几十年来，文献一直表明工作相关的危险因素与员工背部受伤之间存在关联。然而，直到最近，越来越多的文献表明生活方式危险因素也可能与背部受伤有关。本研究的目的是确定选定的生活方式危险因素是否与更大的背部受伤风险相关。此外，在大学员工中，工作状态与事件报告、缺勤天数和工人赔偿（WC）之间可能存在关联。使用健康风险评估（HRA）问卷的汇总数据，对 6053 名大学员工进行了与背部受伤相关的生活方式危险因素分析。在总样本中，57%（n=3471）为女性；46%（n=2778）为文书或服务人员；平均年龄为 45 岁。皮尔逊卡方（chi(2)）分析表明，工作状态（chi(2)=307.07，df=4，p<.001）和性别（chi(2)=40.14，df=2，p<.001）与高风险背部评分相关。有序回归分析预测，与不剧烈运动或每周运动少于 3 天的参与者相比，每周至少剧烈运动 20 分钟 3 天或更多天，或每周运动 3 天或更多天的剧烈运动和中等强度体力活动的参与者，背部高风险评分的可能性几乎低 30 倍（OR=29.68，95% CI=25-35.25，p<.001）。与 BMI 风险评分高的参与者相比，BMI 风险评分低的参与者（OR=3.20，95% CI=2.74-3.75，p<.001）背部高风险评分的可能性低三倍。回归树预测，背部高风险评分的参与者为：（1）接受适量的体力活动或剧烈运动且为男性服务或文书人员；（2）未接受适量的体力活动或剧烈运动，且体重正常；或（3）未接受适量的体力活动或剧烈运动，且超重。六年的职业安全与健康管理局（OSHA）300 日志和 WC 理赔数据显示，文书或服务人员背部受伤的风险最大。基于这项研究的结果，似乎在大学员工的生活方式危险因素、工作状态和背部受伤之间存在关联。我们相信我们的评估方法可用于研究其他工作人群，以验证本研究中观察到的结果。
