Danish Ramazzini Centre, Department of Occupational Medicine, Palle Juul-Jensens Boulevard 99, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus N, Denmark.
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2023 Oct 1;49(7):453-465. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.4114. Epub 2023 Aug 15.
The association between occupational mechanical exposures and low-back pain (LBP) has been studied in several systematic reviews. However, no systematic review addressing chronic LBP exists. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the association between occupational mechanical exposures and chronic LBP.
The study was registered in PROSPERO. We used an existing systematic review to identify articles published before January 2014. For studies published between January 2014 and September 2022, a systematic literature search was conducted in six databases. Two authors independently excluded articles, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias and level of evidence (GRADE). Meta-analyses were conducted using random-effects models comparing highest versus lowest exposure group with sensitivity analyses based on study quality (low/moderate versus high risk of bias), study design (cohort versus case-control), and outcome definition (non-specific LBP versus specific chronic LBP).
Twenty-six articles were included. Highest pooled odd ratios (OR) were found for combined mechanical exposures [OR 2.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-3.6], lifting/carrying loads (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2.2), and non-neutral postures (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.2-1.9). For the remaining mechanical exposures (ie, whole-body vibrations, standing/walking, and sitting), OR ranged between 1.0 and 1.4. In the sensitivity analyses, generally, higher pooled OR were found in low/moderate risk of bias studies, case-control studies, and studies of specific chronic LBP.
Moderate evidence of an association was found for lifting/carrying loads, non-neutral postures, and combined mechanical exposures. Low or very low evidence was found for whole-body vibrations, standing/walking, and sitting. Studies using standardized exposure definition, metric, and technical measurements are highly warranted.
职业机械暴露与下背痛(LBP)之间的关联已在多项系统评价中进行了研究。然而,目前尚无针对慢性 LBP 的系统评价。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是检验职业机械暴露与慢性 LBP 之间的关联。
该研究已在 PROSPERO 注册。我们使用现有的系统评价来确定 2014 年 1 月之前发表的文章。对于 2014 年 1 月至 2022 年 9 月期间发表的研究,我们在六个数据库中进行了系统文献检索。两名作者独立排除文章、提取数据,并评估了偏倚风险和证据水平(GRADE)。使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析,比较最高暴露组与最低暴露组,同时根据研究质量(低/中度与高偏倚风险)、研究设计(队列与病例对照)和结局定义(非特异性 LBP 与特异性慢性 LBP)进行敏感性分析。
共纳入 26 篇文章。对于综合机械暴露(OR 2.2,95%置信区间[CI] 1.4-3.6)、举物/搬运负荷(OR 1.7,95% CI 1.4-2.2)和非中立姿势(OR 1.5,95% CI 1.2-1.9),最高汇总比值比(OR)最高。对于其余的机械暴露(即全身振动、站立/行走和坐姿),OR 介于 1.0 至 1.4 之间。在敏感性分析中,在低/中度偏倚风险研究、病例对照研究和特异性慢性 LBP 研究中,一般发现更高的汇总 OR。
对于举物/搬运负荷、非中立姿势和综合机械暴露,有中等证据表明存在关联。对于全身振动、站立/行走和坐姿,证据水平较低或非常低。高度需要使用标准化暴露定义、度量和技术测量的研究。