The impact of breaking up sitting during simulated nightshifts on musculoskeletal pain: A randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Prolonged sitting is associated with an increased risk of musculoskeletal pain, especially in nightshift workers. However, research investigating effects of breaking up sitting on musculoskeletal pain during nightshifts is lacking. This study evaluated effects of prolonged sitting or breaking up sitting with short bouts of light-intensity physical activity on pain in healthy adults during simulated nightshifts. METHODS: An in-laboratory randomised controlled trial was undertaken with 52 healthy adults completing five simulated nightshifts. Participants were randomised to prolonged sitting (Sit9; n = 26) or breaking up prolonged sitting (Break9; n = 26). Break9 group completed 3-min walking every 30 min during nightshifts, while Sit9 group remained seated. Musculoskeletal pain intensity and sensory/affective pain experiences were assessed. Linear mixed models examined pain within nights (pre-to post-shift) and across nights (pre-shift-night-1 to pre-shift-night-5). RESULTS: Musculoskeletal pain intensity increased within nights for both Sit9 (mean change [95%CI] points: 0.14 [0.05, 0.24]) and Break9 (0.09 [0.001, 0.19], but not across nights (Sit9: -0.13 [-0.33, 0.08]; Break9: 0.07 [-0.14, 0.29]). Sensory-pain experience improved across nights for Sit9 (-3.08 [-4.72, -1.45]), but not within nights (0.77 [-0.004, 1.55]). There was no change in affective-pain experience in either group. Between-group difference was observed favouring Sit9 for improving sensory-pain across nights (ß: 3.71 [1.42, 5.99]). No other between-group difference was observed. CONCLUSION: Both prolonged sitting and breaking up sitting were associated with a within-night increase in musculoskeletal pain intensity. Compared to prolonged sitting, breaking up sitting did not induce benefits on pain in healthy adults working simulated nightshifts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619001516178.

Move the night way: how can physical activity facilitate adaptation to shift work?

Shift work, involving night work, leads to impaired sleep, cognition, health and wellbeing, and an increased risk of occupational incidents. Current countermeasures include circadian adaptation to phase shift circadian biomarkers. However, evidence of real-world circadian adaptation is found primarily in occupations where light exposure is readily controlled. Despite this, non-photic adaptation to shift work remains under researched. Other markers of shift work adaptation exist (e.g., improvements in cognition and wellbeing outcomes) but are relatively unexplored. Timeframes for shift work adaptation involve changes which occur over a block of shifts, or over a shift working career. We propose an additional shift work adaptation timeframe exists which encompasses acute within shift changes in markers of adaptation. We also propose that physical activity might be an accessible and cost-effective countermeasure that could influence multiple markers of adaptation across three timeframes (Within Shift, Within Block, Within Work-span). Finally, practical considerations for shift workers, shift work industries and future research are identified.

Effects of pharmacotherapy on sleep-related outcomes in adults with chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Background: Adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP) suffer impaired sleep. Medications for CLBP can impact sleep which in turn may influence treatment outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effects of pharmacotherapy (any type) on sleep in adults with CLBP. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from inception to 10 July 2022. Randomised controlled trials that investigated the effects of pharmacotherapy on sleep in adults with CLBP were included. Manual citation search of relevant systematic reviews and included studies were also conducted. Mean change from baseline for sleep outcomes (e.g., sleep quality, total sleep time, wake after sleep onset) was the effect of interest. Pairwise inverse-variance random effect meta-analysis was performed to impute pooled estimates (Hedges' g or risk ratios). The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method was used where there were ≤5 studies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used for evaluating the certainty of evidence. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022309419). Findings: Assessment of 3959 records resulted in nine studies (n = 2927) being included. Pharmacotherapy for CLBP management had a small, yet unlikely clinically significant, effect on improving sleep in adults with CLBP, when compared to placebo (g [95% CI]: -0.23 [-0.37, -0.09], p = .0009; I 2  = 30.1%; n = 1433; studies: n = 8; GRADE: low). Notably, no eligible studies investigated the effect of sleep medications in this population, despite being within the scope of this review. Interpretation: Pharmacotherapy used to manage CLBP provided improvements in sleep in adults with CLBP. Given that these effects were small and unlikely clinically significant, clinicians could consider alternative treatments (e.g., non-pharmacological interventions) for managing sleep in adults with CLBP. However, low to very low certainty of evidence precluded strong conclusions. To improve certainty of evidence and confidence in the effect estimates, future research needs to use robust method to minimise bias. Additional research evaluating multiple sleep characteristics, using both validated objective and subjective measures, is also warranted to further investigate the influence of distinct sleep parameters. Funding: The Summer Research Scholarship from the Appleton Institute, Central Queensland University, Australia.