The Digital Economy and Hybrid Work Call for a Review of Compensation Criteria for Musculoskeletal Disorders.

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSD) pose a significant occupational health challenge in Europe. The digitization of the economy substantially reshaped the nature and organization of work. The proliferation of hybrid working, characterized by a combination of office-based and remote work, has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This review covers hybrid forms of work, their impact on WRMSDs, and the potential implications for WRMSD compensation. Approximately 30-40% of the European workforce could potentially transition to hybrid forms of work. Hybrid work arrangements can result in prolonged static postures of the trunk, neck, and upper limbs without adequate breaks, thereby increasing the risk of neck and lower back pain. As teleworking and hybrid working become more prevalent, an increase in non-specific WRMSDs is anticipated among the working population. In many countries, claims for WRMSDs necessitate a formal diagnosis by a healthcare professional. However, cases of non-specific WRMSDs, such as cervicalgia or chronic shoulder pain, - commonly observed in sedentary workers engaged in predominantly low-intensity, prolonged static work amid visually and cognitively demanding tasks - often do not meet the criteria for compensation as occupational diseases. The compensation system and/or the criteria for compensation must be adapted to accommodate the rise of telework, necessitating evolving criteria for compensation that address both medical and risk exposure considerations.

Return-to-work, disabilities and occupational health in the age of COVID-19.

We have read with great interest the two editorials by Burdorf et al: "The COVID-19 pandemic: one year later - an occupational perspective" (1) and "The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) pandemic: consequences for occupational health" (2). The authors highlight the importance of the societal consequences of the outbreak and changes in the world of work to manage occupational health. The key points identified - such as individual socio-economic factors, psychological effects and occupations with highest risk of contamination - modify return-to-work approaches. It is estimated that around 800 million people of working age worldwide were living with disabilities before the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In early January 2021, the cumulative COVID-19 hospitalisation rate reached 207.4/100 000 (18-49-year-olds) and 505.7/100 000 (50-64-year-olds), respectively, in the United States (3). In France, the hospitalisation rate was 411.5/100 000 across all ages (4). A recent cohort study of working-age men who were hospitalised for COVID-19 highlighted the long-term health consequences of such a disease (5). The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic creates new challenges for occupational health, shifting attention away from return-to-work after health problems to resuming work during an outbreak, dealing with lockdown, and taking special account of workers with vulnerabilities (6, 7). We recommend considering three different aspects of occupational medicine during a pandemic. Firstly, for most workers at high-risk of severe COVID-19, the issues of work disability and resuming work had never occurred before the epidemic. Recommendations such as physical and social distancing and wearing a facemask are highly advisable to protect against infection but may not be enough to enable some individuals to resume work. Therefore, decision-making requires individual comprehensive assessments of the underlying medical condition, the SARS-CoV-2 contamination risk associated with either regular work or teleworking, and vaccination opportunities. The second situation concerns workers who have suffered from COVID-19. Preliminary studies suggest that long recovery duration is related to high severity (7), but this is still a matter of debate for patients suffering from "long COVID-19" (5, 8, 9), a condition for which the long-term effects remain unknown. Any long-running recovery must be considered to be a potential sign of long COVID-19. These long-lasting syndromes occur among patients with severe symptoms but have also been reported independently of acute phase severity, hospitalisation and receiving medical oxygen (8, 9). Researchers worldwide are currently investigating such syndromes. Strategies promoting return to work for these workers will need to be implemented and could be similar to programmes developed for other chronic conditions. Moreover, numerous more serious sequelae following critical illness suggest the need for enhanced support by rehabilitation and occupational health specialists. Finally, the consequences of the epidemic must be evaluated over time for people who suffered from functional limitations before COVID-19 as their physical and mental condition may be modified by the epidemic and, specifically, the consequences of lockdown (10). In all of these situations, medical, social, financial and working contexts are key elements. In addition to a medical assessment, the use of scales such as the Work Ability Index (WAI) (11) or the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) (12) can help perform long-term follow-up and provide information about work capacity and workload. It also gives a "back to basics" perspective, urging politicians to move towards a `decent-work-for-all` policy, as advocated by the United Nation`s Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 8, which the WHO has endorsed (13). References 1. Burdorf A, Porru F, Rugulies R. The COVID-19 pandemic: one year later - an occupational perspective. Scand J Work Environ Health - online first. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3956 2. Burdorf A, Porru F, Rugulies R. The COVID-19 (Coronavirus) pandemic: consequences for occupational health. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2020;46(3):229-230. https://doi:org/10.5271/sjweh.3893. 3. COVID-19 Hospitalizations [Internet]. Available from: https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/COVIDNet/COVID19_3.html 4. COVID-19 in France, vaccine and allergy management in occupational setting. Descatha A et al. Arch Mal Prof Environ 2021. Accepted for publication. 5. Huang C, Huang L, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Gu X, et al. 6-month consequences of COVID-19 in patients discharged from hospital: a cohort study. Lancet 2021;397(10270):220-32 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32656-8 6. Shaw WS, Main CJ, Findley PA, Collie A, Kristman VL, Gross DP. Opening the Workplace After COVID-19: What Lessons Can be Learned from Return-to-Work Research? J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30(3):299-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-020-09908-9 7. Taylor T, Das R, Mueller K, Pransky G, Christian J, Orford R, et al. Safely Returning America to Work: Part I: General Guidance for Employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2020;62(9):771-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001984 8. Carfì A, Bernabei R, Landi F, Gemelli Against COVID-19 Post-Acute Care Study Group. Persistent Symptoms in Patients After Acute COVID-19. JAMA. 2020;324(6):603-5. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12603 9. Tenforde MW, Kim SS, Lindsell CJ, Billig Rose E, Shapiro NI, Files DC, et al. Symptom Duration and Risk Factors for Delayed Return to Usual Health Among Outpatients with COVID-19 in a Multistate Health Care Systems Network - United States, March-June 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly. 2020;69(30):993-8. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6930e1 10. Chudasama YV, Gillies CL, Zaccardi F, Coles B, Davies MJ, Seidu S, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on routine care for chronic diseases: A global survey of views from healthcare professionals. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2020;14(5):965-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2020.06.042 11. Tuomi K. Eleven-year follow-up of aging workers. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997;23(1):1-71. 12. Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. PharmacoEconomics. 1993;4(5):353-65. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199304050-00006 13. Organization WH. Health in the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Sixty-Ninth World Health Assembly. Document A. 2016, p69.

The effect of exposure to long working hours on stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large network of individual experts. Evidence from mechanistic data and prior studies suggests that exposure to long working hours may cause stroke. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of parameters for estimating the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years from stroke that are attributable to exposure to long working hours, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of exposure to long working hours (three categories: 41-48, 49-54 and ≥55 h/week), compared with exposure to standard working hours (35-40 h/week), on stroke (three outcomes: prevalence, incidence, and mortality). DATA SOURCES: A protocol was developed and published, applying the Navigation Guide to systematic reviews as an organizing framework where feasible. We searched electronic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CISDOC, PsycINFO, and WHO ICTRP. We also searched grey literature databases, Internet search engines, and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews; and consulted additional experts. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: We included working-age (≥15 years) individuals in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (aged < 15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of the effect of exposure to long working hours (41-48, 49-54 and ≥55 h/week), compared with exposure to standard working hours (35-40 h/week), on stroke (prevalence, incidence or mortality). STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first review stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. Missing data were requested from principal study authors. We combined relative risks using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias, quality of evidence and strength of evidence, using the Navigation Guide and GRADE tools and approaches adapted to this project. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies (20 cohort studies, 2 case-control studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 839,680 participants (364,616 females) in eight countries from three WHO regions (Americas, Europe, and Western Pacific). The exposure was measured using self-reports in all studies, and the outcome was assessed with administrative health records (13 studies), self-reported physician diagnosis (7 studies), direct diagnosis by a physician (1 study) or during a medical interview (1 study). The outcome was defined as an incident non-fatal stroke event in nine studies (7 cohort studies, 2 case-control studies), incident fatal stroke event in one cohort study and incident non-fatal or fatal ("mixed") event in 12 studies (all cohort studies). Cohort studies were judged to have a relatively low risk of bias; therefore, we prioritized evidence from these studies, but synthesised evidence from case-control studies as supporting evidence. For the bodies of evidence for both outcomes with any eligible studies (i.e. stroke incidence and mortality), we did not have serious concerns for risk of bias (at least for the cohort studies). Eligible studies were found on the effects of long working hours on stroke incidence and mortality, but not prevalence. Compared with working 35-40 h/week, we were uncertain about the effect on incidence of stroke due to working 41-48 h/week (relative risk (RR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.14, 18 studies, 277,202 participants, I2 0%, low quality of evidence). There may have been an increased risk for acquiring stroke when working 49-54 h/week compared with 35-40 h/week (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.00-1.28, 17 studies, 275,181participants, I2 0%, p 0.04, moderate quality of evidence). Compared with working 35-40 h/week, working ≥55 h/week may have led to a moderate, clinically meaningful increase in the risk of acquiring stroke, when followed up between one year and 20 years (RR 1.35, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.61, 7 studies, 162,644 participants, I2 3%, moderate quality of evidence). Compared with working 35-40 h/week, we were very uncertain about the effect on dying (mortality) of stroke due to working 41-48 h/week (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.91-1.12, 12 studies, 265,937 participants, I2 0%, low quality of evidence), 49-54 h/week (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99-1.29, 11 studies, 256,129 participants, I2 0%, low quality of evidence) and 55 h/week (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.89-1.31, 10 studies, 664,647 participants, I2 20%, low quality of evidence). Subgroup analyses found no evidence for differences by WHO region, age, sex, socioeconomic status and type of stroke. Sensitivity analyses found no differences by outcome definition (exclusively non-fatal or fatal versus "mixed") except for the comparison working ≥55 h/week versus 35-40 h/week for stroke incidence (p for subgroup differences: 0.05), risk of bias ("high"/"probably high" ratings in any domain versus "low"/"probably low" in all domains), effect estimate measures (risk versus hazard versus odds ratios) and comparator (exact versus approximate definition). CONCLUSIONS: We judged the existing bodies of evidence for human evidence as "inadequate evidence for harmfulness" for all exposure categories for stroke prevalence and mortality and for exposure to 41-48 h/week for stroke incidence. Evidence on exposure to 48-54 h/week and ≥55 h/week was judged as "limited evidence for harmfulness" and "sufficient evidence for harmfulness" for stroke incidence, respectively. Producing estimates for the burden of stroke attributable to exposures to working 48-54 and ≥55 h/week appears evidence-based, and the pooled effect estimates presented in this systematic review could be used as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. PROTOCOL IDENTIFIER: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.016. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017060124.

Shoulder pain among male industrial workers: Validation of a conceptual model in two independent French working populations.

This study aims to validate a conceptual model for shoulder pain risk factors in two independent samples of male industrial workers: the Cosali cohort (n = 334) and one pharmaceutical company (n = 487). Direct and indirect relationships between work organization factors (automatic speed of a machine or movement of a product and work pace dependent on customers' demand), psychosocial factors (Job strain model), biomechanical factors (working with abducted arms, working with arms at or above shoulder level, and perceived physical exertion), perceived stress, and shoulder pain were explored using structural equation models. Shoulder pain was positively associated with biomechanical exposure in both samples, and with perceived stress only in the pharmaceutical preparation manufacturer, while factors related to work organization and psychosocial factors had indirect impacts on the risk of chronic shoulder pain in both samples. The results provide a deeper understanding of the complex relationships between workplace risk factors and shoulder pain.

Effort-reward imbalance and long-term benzodiazepine use: longitudinal findings from the CONSTANCES cohort.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between effort-reward imbalance and incident long-term benzodiazepine use (LTBU). METHODS: We included 31 077 employed participants enrolled in the French population-based CONSTANCES cohort between 2012 and 2014 who had not undergone LTBU in the 2 years before enrolment. LTBU was examined using drug reimbursement administrative databases. The effort-reward imbalance was calculated in quartiles. We computed ORs (95% CIs) for LTBU according to effort-reward imbalance over a 2-year follow-up period. We adjusted for age, gender, education, occupational grade, income, marital status, tobacco smoking, risk of alcohol use disorder, depressive symptoms and self-rated health. RESULTS: Over the 2-year follow-up, 294 (0.9%) participants experienced incident LTBU. In the univariable analysis, effort-reward imbalance was associated with subsequent LTBU with ORs of 1.79 (95% CI 1.23 to 2.62) and 2.73 (95% CI 1.89 to 3.95) for the third and fourth quartiles, respectively, compared with the first quartile. There was no interaction between effort-reward imbalance and any of the considered variables other than tobacco smoking (p=0.033). The association remained significant in both smokers and non-smokers, with higher odds for smokers (p=0.031). In the fully adjusted model, the association remained significant for the third and fourth quartiles, with ORs of 1.74 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.57) and 2.18 (95% CI 1.50 to 3.16), respectively. These associations were dose dependent (p for trend <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Effort-reward imbalance was linked with incident LTBU over a 2-year follow-up period after adjustment for sociodemographic and health-related factors. Thus, screening and prevention of the risk of LTBU should be systematised among individuals experiencing effort-reward imbalance, with special attention paid to smokers.

Prevalence of prescribed benzodiazepine long-term use in the French general population according to sociodemographic and clinical factors: findings from the CONSTANCES cohort.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking regarding the prevalence of benzodiazepine long-term use in the general population. Our aim was to examine the prevalence of prescribed benzodiazepine long-term use (BLTU) according to sociodemographic and clinical factors in the French general population. METHODS: Data came from 4686 men and 4849 women included in 2015 in the French population-based CONSTANCES cohort. BLTU was examined using drug reimbursement administrative registries from 2009 to 2015. Analyses were weighted to provide results representative of the French general population covered by the general health insurance scheme. Weighted prevalence of BTLU and weighted Odds Ratios (OR) of having BTLU were computed with their 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) according to age, education level, occupational status, occupational grade, household income, marital status, alcohol use disorder risk and depressive symptoms. All the analyses were stratified for gender. RESULTS: Weighted prevalence of BLTU were 2.8%(95% CI:2.3-3.4) and 3.8%(95% CI: 3.3-4.5) in men and women, respectively. Compared to men, women had an increased risk of having benzodiazepine long-term use with OR = 1.34(95% CI = 1.02-1.76). Aging, low education, not being at-work, low occupational grade, low income, being alone and depressive state were associated with increased risks of having BTLU. CONCLUSIONS: BLTU is widespread in the French general population, however this issue may particularly concern vulnerable subgroups. These findings may help in raising attention on this public health burden as well as targeting specific at-risk subgroups in preventive intervention.

Operational leeway in work situations: do ergonomic risk assessment tools consider operational leeway for job analysis?

Our study shows that information on operational leeway is limited in the originator articles of the ergonomic risk assessment tools for prevention of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). The tools' underlying theoretical models do not consider the indicators of operational leeway, and they cannot determine the sufficiency of the situational operational leeway in a work situation. Consequently, regulation of the activity, which ensures the performance goals and the individual's health, has been overlooked. The lack of literature on indicators of situational operational leeway is one of the reasons for this deficit. Defining the indicators for this concept would be an innovation in the approach of MSD risk prevention. Developing empirically the concept of situational operational leeway in risk assessment tools would help to progress the current approach of MSD prevention. This study therefore proposes indicators of situational operational leeway to increase the representativeness and reliability of the risk assessment tools for MSDs.

Work-Related Stressors and Increased Risk of Benzodiazepine Long-Term Use: Findings From the CONSTANCES Population-Based Cohort.

Objectives. To examine whether stressful job exposure to the public could be associated with having long-term benzodiazepine use.Methods. From the participants included between 2012 and 2016 in the French population-based CONSTANCES cohort, 13 934 men and 19 261 women declared a daily job exposure to the public and rated the frequency of stressful exposure. We examined benzodiazepine long-term use by using drug reimbursement administrative registries. Logistic regressions provided odds ratios (ORs) of benzodiazepine long-term use, with stratification for gender and adjustment for age, education, and area deprivation index. Occupational grade, job strain, depression, self-rated health, and alcohol use disorder were additional stratification variables.Results. Benzodiazepine long-term use was positively associated with stressful exposure to the public ("often or always" vs "rarely or never") in men (OR = 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.8, 2.8) and women (OR = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.4, 1.9), with dose-dependent relationships (P trends < .001). Adjustments and analyses in subgroups without other individual or environmental vulnerability factors led to similar results.Conclusions. Stressful job exposure to the public increases the risk of benzodiazepine long-term use. Prevention programs aiming at reducing the burden of benzodiazepine long-term use would benefit in targeting this specific population.

French good practice guidelines for management of the risk of low back pain among workers exposed to manual material handling: Hierarchical strategy of risk assessment of work situations.

BACKGROUND: Manual material handling remains a major cause of occupational accidents and diseases in various sectors and occupations. OBJECTIVE: This paper summarizes the main recommendations of the good practice guidelines of the French Society of Occupational Medicine for the risk assessment for back disorders in workers exposed to manual handling of loads. METHODS: The guidelines were written by a multidisciplinary working group of 24 experts, according to the Clinical Practice Guidelines method proposed by French National Health Authority, and reviewed by a multidisciplinary peer review committee of 50 experts. Recommendations were based on a large systematic review of the international literature carried out from 1990 to March 2012 and classified (Grade A, B, C or expert consensus) according to their level of evidence. RESULTS: The main recommendations are a three-level hierarchical method of risk assessment based on participatory ergonomics and suggested assessment tools that can be used routinely by professionals of occupational health, workers themselves and their supervisors. CONCLUSION: These French guidelines are intended for professionals of occupational health in charge of the prevention of low back disorders. The recommended methods are applicable to other countries than France.

A comparison of neck bending and flexion measurement methods for assessment of ergonomic risk.

Head movements of workers were measured in the sagittal plane in order to establish a precise and accurate assessment method to be used in real work situations. Measurements were performed using two inclinometers connected to an embedded recording system. Two quantitative analysis methods were tested, i.e., measurement of bending with an inclinometer attached to the head, and measurement of flexion/extension by using an additional inclinometer located at C7/T1. The results were also compared with a video observation method (qualitative). The results showed that bending measurements were significantly different from those of flexion/extension for angles between 0° and 20°, and angles >45°. There were also significant differences between workers for flexion >45°, reflecting individual variability. Additionally, several limitations of observational methods were revealed by this study.

Underreporting of musculoskeletal disorders in 10 regions in France in 2009.

BACKGROUND: Underreporting of occupational diseases (OD) has been quantified, in particular in the United States, but little information is available in other countries. The aim of this study was to evaluate underreporting of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in France in 2009. METHODS: We calculated an indicator that approximated the underreporting rate of MSD in 10 regions of France. Two databases were used: data on OD compensated by insurance funding and data from the surveillance program for uncompensated work-related diseases. Analyses were performed for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) and elbow, shoulder, and lumbar spine MSD. RESULTS: The underreporting rate was estimated at 59% (range 52-64%) for CTS, 73% (range 67-79%) for elbow MSD, 69% (range 63-74%) for shoulder MSD, and 63% (range 50-76%) for lumbar spine MSD. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that MSD are substantially underreported in France, as in the United States, despite the differences in workers' compensation systems.

[MSDs and job security of employees aged 50 years and over: a challenge for occupational health and public health]. / Les TMS et le maintien en emploi des salariés de 50 ans et plus: un défi pour la santé au travail et la santé publique.

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs (MSDs) are the first cause of occupational illness in France, as in Europe. A pilot network for epidemiological surveillance system of MSDs has been implemented in France's Loire Valley region to assess the prevalence of MSDs and their risk factors in the working population, namely the ageing workforce. The surveillance was based on a network of occupational physicians and used the recommendations of a group of European experts ('Saltsa Criteria document' consensus). Between 2002 and 2004, 3710 men and women (aged 20-59) representative of the regional workforce were randomly selected. Exposure to risk factors of MSDs was evaluated by the use of a self-administered questionnaire which aimed to assess bio-mechanical and psychosocial risk factors. With at least one of the six primary MSDs of the upper limbs having been clinically diagnosed using a rigorous protocol, the prevalence of clinically-diagnosed MSDs was high: about 11% of male and 15% of female workers suffered from at least one of the MSDs studied. After age fifty, about 19% of male and 27% of female workers suffered from at least one MSD and 4% of male and 6% of female workers from at least two disorders. Blue-collar workers were the most affected, regardless of age or gender, followed by office employees. Exposure to MSD risk factors of remained high after age fifty: 77% of male and 72% of female blue-collar workers were exposed to at least two MSD risk factors. The implications for the prevention of MSDs and job security of workers are discussed. The high prevalence of specific MSDs of the upper limb combined with a high exposure to risk factors of MSDs in ageing workers emphasizes the need to implement comprehensive prevention programs in most sectors to reduce the exposure to risk, the prevalence of MSDs and ensure the capacity to keep employees suffering from MSDs working, or at least to quickly return to work after recovery.

Surveillance program of neck and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders: assessment over a 4 year period in a large company.

OBJECTIVE: A company-wide surveillance program for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) based on the assessment of health and risk factors was implemented between 1996 and 2000 in a large shoe factory. The study aimed to compare the results of the surveillance program in 1996 and 1997 with the occurrence of MSDs in 2000. METHODS: A health and ergonomic assessment of workstations was performed for 253 workers in 1996. Of these, 166 were examined again in both 1997 and 2000. A set of criteria was used to predict whether or not a job category could be predicted to have a potentially high risk of MSDs in 1996 and 1997 and the results were compared with the incidence rate of MSDs in the job category in 2000. RESULTS: The criteria based on prevalence data in 1996 were unable to detect the job categories characterized by the occurrence of MSDs in 2000. The criterion based on an incidence rate >1% in 1997 was sensitive and specific. The agreement between the ranking of the job categories according to incidence rate of MSDs in 1997 and 2000 was good (rho=0.57, P=0.11). Agreement of the prediction based on ergonomic exposure was lower than that based on incidence data. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of the surveillance program to predict on a collective basis the job categories in which numerous cases of MSDs occurred in 2000 depended on the decision criteria used. The criteria based on the incidence of MSDs were more reliable to predict the risk of MSDs than those based on prevalence data or on exposure assessment. Because exposure assessment plays a greater role in determining the priorities for ergonomic intervention, surveillance of health and exposure must nevertheless be combined to predict the risk of MSDs in the plant in the short and middle terms.

Biomechanical assessment of new hand-powered pruning shears.

The aim of the study was to assess the biomechanical strains on the hand-wrist system during grapevine pruning with newly designed pruning shears. Surface electromyography of the finger flexor muscle and wrist postures were analyzed in four vineyard workers during actual work with the new and reference hand-powered pruning shears. Due to the large inter-individual differences in biomechanical data observed with both pruning shears, no systematic effect of the new pruning shears on "extreme" flexion/extension (F/E) and ulnar/radial (U/R) wrist deviations was demonstrated. However, the use of the new pruning shears was associated with a higher frequency of "neutral and moderate" U/R deviations (U/R < 20%(max)) and, to a lesser extent, of "neutral and moderate" F/E deviations (F/E < 20%(max)). Due to the small sample of workers, this result must be confirmed in a larger population of vineyard workers.