Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, P.O. Box 40, 00032, Työterveyslaitos, Helsinki, Finland.
Center for Life Course Health Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
J Occup Rehabil. 2022 Dec;32(4):731-742. doi: 10.1007/s10926-022-10036-9. Epub 2022 Apr 6.
Purpose In order to support people with low back pain (LBP) to stay at work, work arrangements are regarded important. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a workplace intervention using a participatory approach on work disability of workers with ongoing or recurrent LBP. Methods A total of 107 workers with LBP, with duration of pain for at least two consecutive weeks or recurrent pain of any duration during the last year, were randomized either to the intervention (n = 51) or control group (n = 56). The intervention included arrangements at the workplace, along with individual guidance provided by an occupational physiotherapist (OPT). The randomized intervention study used standard counselling and guidance by an OPT without workplace intervention as a comparison. Surveys were completed at baseline, and 6 and 12 months after baseline. Results There were no statistically significant differences between the intervention and control groups on the primary outcome measure, i.e. self-assessed work ability. We found no between-group differences in perceived health, self-assessed work productivity, number of sickness absence days and severity of back pain. However, there were significant positive within-group changes in the intervention group in the intensity of LBP, perceived health and the number of sickness absence days due to LBP. Conclusion Workplace arrangements are feasible using participatory ergonomics, but more quantitative and qualitative research is needed on its utilization and effectiveness among workers with LBP.
目的 为了支持腰痛(LBP)患者继续工作,工作安排被认为是重要的。本研究旨在评估采用参与式方法对持续或复发性 LBP 工人的工作残疾进行工作场所干预的效果。
方法 共有 107 名持续疼痛至少连续两周或在过去一年中反复疼痛任何持续时间的 LBP 工人随机分为干预组(n=51)或对照组(n=56)。干预包括工作场所的安排,以及由职业物理治疗师(OPT)提供的个人指导。随机干预研究使用标准咨询和 OPT 指导作为对照,不进行工作场所干预。在基线、6 个月和 12 个月后完成调查。
结果 主要结局指标,即自我评估的工作能力,干预组和对照组之间无统计学差异。我们发现,在健康感知、自我评估的工作生产力、病假天数和背痛严重程度方面,两组之间没有差异。然而,干预组在 LBP 强度、健康感知和因 LBP 导致的病假天数方面均有显著的积极变化。
结论 采用参与式人体工程学进行工作场所安排是可行的,但需要更多关于其在 LBP 工人中的利用和效果的定量和定性研究。