Varatharajan Sharanya, Côté Pierre, Shearer Heather M, Loisel Patrick, Wong Jessica J, Southerst Danielle, Yu Hainan, Randhawa Kristi, Sutton Deborah, van der Velde Gabrielle, Mior Silvano, Carroll Linda J, Jacobs Craig, Taylor-Vaisey Anne
UOIT-CMCC Centre for the Study of Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT), 6100 Leslie Street, Toronto, ON, M2H 3J1, Canada,
J Occup Rehabil. 2014 Dec;24(4):692-708. doi: 10.1007/s10926-014-9501-1.
We conducted a systematic review to critically appraise and synthesize literature on the effectiveness of work disability prevention (WDP) interventions in workers with neck pain, whiplash-associated disorders (WAD), or upper extremity disorders.
We searched electronic databases from 1990 to 2012. Random pairs of independent reviewers critically appraised eligible studies using the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Scientifically admissible studies were summarized and synthesized following best-evidence synthesis methodology.
Of the 6,359 articles retrieved, 16 randomized controlled trials were eligible for critical appraisal and five were admissible. We found that a return-to-work coordination program (including workplace-based work hardening) was superior to clinic-based work hardening for persistent rotator cuff tendinitis. Workplace high-intensity strength training and workplace advice had similar outcomes for neck and shoulder pain. Mensendieck/Cesar postural exercises and strength and fitness exercises had similar outcomes for non-specific work-related upper limb complaints. Adding a brief job stress education program to a workplace ergonomic intervention was not beneficial for persistent upper extremity symptoms. Adding computer-prompted work breaks to ergonomic adjustments and workplace education benefited workers' recovery from recent work-related neck and upper extremity complaints.
At present, no firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the effectiveness of WDP interventions for managing neck pain, WAD, and upper extremity disorders. Our review suggests a return-to-work coordination program is more effective than clinic-based work hardening. Also, adding computer-prompted breaks to ergonomic and workplace interventions benefits workers' recovery. The current quality of evidence does not allow for a definitive evaluation of the effectiveness of ergonomic interventions.
我们进行了一项系统评价,以严格评估和综合有关工作残疾预防(WDP)干预措施对颈部疼痛、挥鞭样损伤相关疾病(WAD)或上肢疾病工人有效性的文献。
我们检索了1990年至2012年的电子数据库。随机配对的独立评审员使用苏格兰校际指南网络标准对符合条件的研究进行严格评估。按照最佳证据综合方法对科学上可接受的研究进行总结和综合。
在检索到的6359篇文章中,有16项随机对照试验符合严格评估条件,5项可接受。我们发现,对于持续性肩袖肌腱炎,重返工作协调计划(包括基于工作场所的工作强化训练)优于基于诊所的工作强化训练。工作场所高强度力量训练和工作场所建议对颈部和肩部疼痛的效果相似。门森迪克/塞萨尔姿势练习以及力量和健身练习对非特异性工作相关上肢不适的效果相似。在工作场所人体工程学干预中增加简短的工作压力教育计划对持续性上肢症状没有益处。在人体工程学调整和工作场所教育中增加计算机提示的工作休息时间有利于工人从近期与工作相关的颈部和上肢不适中恢复。
目前,关于WDP干预措施对管理颈部疼痛、WAD和上肢疾病的有效性无法得出确凿结论。我们的评价表明,重返工作协调计划比基于诊所的工作强化训练更有效。此外,在人体工程学和工作场所干预中增加计算机提示的休息时间有利于工人的恢复。目前的证据质量不允许对人体工程学干预的有效性进行明确评估。