Effectiveness of a Goldilocks work intervention to promote musculoskeletal health among industrial workers - A cluster randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Industrial workers with physically demanding work have increased risk of musculoskeletal pain. The present 12-week Goldilocks Work intervention aimed to organize work among industrial workers to comprise a 'just right' ergonomic balance of physical behaviors (i.e., sit, stand and active) intended to promote musculoskeletal health. The paper investigates the effectiveness of the intervention in reducing low back pain after work. METHODS: 83 workers across 28 workteams in a biotech organization were recruited. Workteams were randomly allocated to receive the intervention or work as usual (control). Intervention workteams implemented the Goldilocks Work planning tool to organize their work tasks towards a predefined 'just right' ergonomic balance (i.e., composition of 60% sitting, 30% standing, 10% active work and hourly task alternation). The primary outcome was low back pain intensity. Secondary outcomes were bodily pain, fatigue, physical exertion, productivity and energy after work measured in the survey, and composition and alternations of physical behaviors measured using wearable sensors. RESULTS: The intervention was delivered almost as planned, with good quality and high adherence among most workteams. However, the intervention did not change physical behaviors towards the intended 'just right' ergonomic balance. No significant reduction in low back pain (0.07, CI 95%: -0.68; 0.82), bodily pain (0.10, CI 95%: -0.57; 0.76), tiredness (-0.53, CI 95%: -1.24; 0.19), physical exertion (-0.18, CI 95%: -0.83; 0.48), or improvement in energy (0.39, CI 95%: -1.02; 0.23) or productivity (-0.03, CI 95%: -0.77; 0.72) were found. CONCLUSION: This Goldilocks Work intervention did not promote musculoskeletal health among industrial workers and did not change physical behaviors as intended. Thus, more research is needed into implementation strategies to change physical behaviors during productive work towards an evidence-based 'just right' ergonomic balance.

The effectiveness of a dynamic seat cushion in preventing neck and low-back pain among high-risk office workers: a 6-month cluster-randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effectiveness of the promotion of postural shift intervention using a dynamic seat cushion on the 6-month incidence of neck and low-back pain among high-risk office workers. METHODS: In a cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT), 133 office workers were randomly assigned, at cluster level, to intervention (N=67) and control (N=66) groups. The intervention group received a dynamic seat cushion to encourage postural shifts during sitting, while the control group received a placebo seat pad. Primary outcomes were 6-month incidence of neck and low-back pain. Secondary outcomes included sitting discomfort, pain intensity, disability, and trunk muscle performance. Analyses utilized Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: During the 6-month period, 15% of participants in the intervention group developed neck pain and 10% developed low-back pain. For the control group, this was 65% and 59%, respectively. Hazard rate (HR) ratios, after adjusting for biopsychosocial factors, indicated a protective effect of the intervention for neck pain [HRadj 0.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09-0.39, P<0.001] and low-back pain (HRadj 0.16, 95% CI 0.07-0.35, P<0.001). The intervention group demonstrated a significant reduction in sitting discomfort and improvement in trunk muscle performance compared to the control group (P<0.05). However, the intervention did not reduce pain and disability in individuals experiencing pain compared to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The dynamic seat cushion effectively reduced the incidence of neck and low-back pain by promoting postural shifts. These findings suggest that the key factor in reducing the risk of developing neck and low-back pain is the facilitation of postural shifts during sitting, which can potentially be achieved with other dynamic interventions designed to reduce prolonged and static sitting among office workers.

Can a Novel Light Weight Minimal Support Lifting Exoskeleton Modify Lifting Movement in People without Low Back Pain?

Low back pain (LBP) is a major contributor to lifting-related disabilities. To minimize the risk of back pain, emerging technologies known as lifting exoskeletons were designed to optimize lifting movements. However, it is currently unknown whether a minimally supportive exoskeleton can alter the lifting movement in people without LBP. This study aims to investigate if wearing a novel lightweight exoskeleton that minimally supports the back, hip, and knee can alter the lifting range of motion and movement variations in people without LBP. This study also aims to investigate if wearing this novel exoskeleton can result in a reliable between-day lifting movement. In two separate sessions (each one week apart), fourteen participants lifted a box (that weighed 10% of their body weight) ten times, once while wearing an exoskeleton and once while not wearing an exoskeleton. Wearing the novel exoskeleton during lifting produced moderate-high, test-retest reliability (Trunk: ICC3,1 = 0.89, 95% CI [0.67, 0.96], SEM = 9.34°; Hip: ICC3,1 = 0.63, 95% CI [0.22, 0.88], SEM = 2.57°; Knee: ICC3,1 = 0.61, 95% CI [0.23, 0.87], SEM = 2.50°). Wearing an exoskeleton significantly decreased the range of motion of the knee (F1,4 = 4.83, p = 0.031, ηp2 = 0.06). Additionally, wearing an exoskeleton significantly decreased hip (diff = 8.38, p = 0.045) and knee (diff = -8.57, p = 0.038) movement variability; however, wearing an exoskeleton did not decrease the movement variability of the body's trunk (diff = 0.60, p = 1.00). Therefore, minimally supported lifting through the use of exoskeletons can modify movement in people without LBP and produce reliable lifting movements. Wearing the novel exoskeleton is also desirable for monitoring lifting movements. Future studies should investigate the use of sensors and IMU to monitor lifting movement at work with the least amount of intrusion on an individual's movement.

A mixed methods approach to describe the efficacy of lift assist device use to reduce low back musculoskeletal disorder risk factors during three common patient extrication scenarios.

This mixed-method study evaluated the efficacy of lift assist device use (Binder®, Eagle®, Maxi Air®) relative to manual lifting/care-as-usual in reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during simulated patient extrication tasks. User feedback was recorded to identify factors that might influence use. Twenty paramedics performed a floor to stretcher lift, lateral transfer, and confined space extrication care-as-usual and with lift assist devices. Use of a lift assist reduced low back muscle activity during floor to stretcher and confined space tasks by 34-47%. Paramedics perceived exertion decreased from 'somewhat hard' to 'light' or 'very light' when using an assistive device. Paramedics noted that ease of use, patient comfort, task time, patient acuity, among other considerations would influence use decisions. Lift assist devices were efficacious at reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during floor to stretcher and patient extrication tasks.

Exercises for the prevention of non-specific low back pain.

OBJECTIVES: This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To evaluate the effects of exercise alone or exercise plus education compared with inactive control or education alone to prevent non-specific LBP.

Implementation of back to living well, a community-based program for the tertiary prevention of low back pain: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: The current literature supports the effectiveness of exercise, education, and self-management interventions for the long-term management of persistent low back pain. However, there is significant uncertainty about the implementation of interventions related to barriers, facilitators, and patient's preferences. This study will evaluate the Back to Living Well program implementation from a participant and organizational perspective. More specifically we address the following objectives: 1) identify program barriers and facilitators from participants' perspectives, 2) identify factors related to program, personal and contextual factors that contribute to negative and positive outcomes, and outcome trajectories, 3) identify factors influencing participants' selection of an in-person or e-health program, and 4) evaluate program specific barriers and facilitators from the organization and care delivery perspectives. METHODS: This study will utilize a mixed-method convergent design including a longitudinal cohort strand and a longitudinal qualitative interview strand. The RE-AIM framework will be used to assess program implementation. Participants (n = 90, 1:1: in person or virtual) who choose to register in the program as well as staff (n = 10 to 15) involved in the delivery of the program will be invited to participate. Participants will participate in a 12-week physical activity, education, and self-management program. Implementation outcomes will be measured at 3-, 6-, 12-months, and six months after the end of the follow-ups. Interview scripts and directed content analysis will be constructed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework and the Neuromatrix Model of Pain, Theoretical Domains Framework. Staff interviews will be constructed and analyzed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Participants will also complete pain, disability, quality of life and psychological questionnaires, wear an activity tracker at all time points, and complete weekly pain and activity limitation questions using a mobile application. DISCUSSION: The study results will provide evidence to inform potential future implementation of the program. An effective, appropriately targeted, and well implemented exercise program for the long-term management (i.e., tertiary prevention) of LBP could minimize the burden of the condition on patients, the health care system and society. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05929846. This (Registration Date: July 3 2023) study has been approved by the Hamilton Integrated Research Ethics Board Project ID#15,354.

The implementation study of nurses' work related low back pain prevention and care guideline: A quasi-experimental study.

AIM: To understand the implementation process and outcomes of nurses' work related low back pain (WLBP) prevention and care guideline. BACKGROUND: WLBP is a common occupational injury for clinical nurses. We developed the first evidence-based guideline of nurses' WLBP prevention and care of its kind both at home and abroad, and it is necessary for us to explore its feasibility, appropriateness and effectiveness in practice. METHODS: Based on the model of the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services, we performed a four-phase implementation study in a tertiary hospital. The study was a non-randomized concurrent controlled trial design，and multilevel measures were examined including implementation outcomes and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: For the implementation outcomes, the tailored recommendations of the guideline were found to be acceptable, appropriate, feasible, and well adopted both at the unit level and the hospital level. The clinical outcomes indicated that, compared with the control unit, nurses of the treatment unit performed better in awareness, knowledge, practice of WLBP prevention and care. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation study supports the successful application of the guideline, which can serve as a valuable evidence-based document to improve back health of nursing personnel.

MyBack - effectiveness and implementation of a behavior change informed exercise programme to prevent low back pain recurrences: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common health condition and the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Most LBP episodes have a favourable prognosis, but recurrences within a year are common. Despite the individual and societal impact related to LBP recurrences, there is limited evidence on effective strategies for secondary prevention of LBP and successful implementation of intervention programmes in a real-world context. The aim of this study is to analyse the effectiveness of a tailored exercise and behavioural change programme (MyBack programme) in the secondary prevention of LBP; and evaluate acceptability, feasibility and determinants of implementation by the different stakeholders, as well as the implementation strategy of the MyBack programme in real context. METHODS: This protocol describes a hybrid type I, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of MyBack programme in the context of primary health care. The Behaviour Change Wheel framework and FITT-VP principles will inform the development of the behaviour change and exercise component of MyBack programme, respectively. Patients who have recently recovered from an episode of non-specific LBP will be randomly assigned to MyBack and usual care group or usual care group. The primary outcome will be the risk of LBP recurrence. The secondary outcomes will include disability, pain intensity, musculoskeletal health, and health-related quality of life. Participants will be followed monthly for 1 year. Costs data related to health care use and the MyBack programme will be also collected. Implementation outcomes will be assessed in parallel with the effectiveness study using qualitative methods (focus groups with participants and health providers) and quantitative data (study enrolment and participation data; participants adherence). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study assessing the effectiveness and implementation of a tailored exercise and behaviour change programme for prevention of LBP recurrences. Despite challenges related to hybrid design, it is expected that data on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and implementation of the MyBack programme may contribute to improve health care in patients at risk of LBP recurrences, contributing to direct and indirect costs reduction for patients and the health system. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05841732.

Stand-Capable Workstations Reduce Occupational Sedentary Time Among Administrative Workers.

OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSIn this study, we found that workers who use stand-biased desks stood more and sat less during their workday compared to workers who use traditional desks. Stand-biased users also experienced significantly less lower back discomfort compared to both traditional and sit-stand workstation users. Based on these findings, we recommend that the use of stand-biased workstations be considered when designing or renovating work office workspaces. The health risks of sedentary behavior are inherent in most office work, but these risks can be alleviated with intentional equipment choices. Using stand-biased desks can encourage workers to move more throughout the workday without their productivity or comfort being disturbed.

Background: Sedentary activity, especially occupational sitting, is a leading cause of musculoskeletal discomfort among office workers. The amount of time employees spend seated is associated with the type of workstation that they utilize.Purpose: We investigated differences in computer utilization, physical activity, and discomfort among office workers who used three workstation types (stand-biased, sit-stand, or traditional).Methods: Among a sample of office workers (n = 61), we used data-logging software to measure computer utilization over 10 days, activity sensors to measure daily general activity levels (i.e., sitting, standing, running, etc.) during the 8am­5pm workday and the 24-h day, and the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) to evaluate discomfort.Results: There was no significant difference in the number of keyclicks between the three groups; however, the stand-biased group had a significantly higher word count and more errors than the traditional group. The 24-h activity data revealed that the stand-biased group had significantly more standing time, less sitting time, and fewer transitions per hour compared to their traditional counterparts.Conclusions: Stand-biased workstations can be a viable workstation alternative to reduce sitting time without decreasing activity or creating additional discomfort.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention for the prevention of low back pain recurrence in Australia (WalkBack): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Recurrence of low back pain is common and a substantial contributor to the disease and economic burden of low back pain. Exercise is recommended to prevent recurrence, but the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an accessible and low-cost intervention, such as walking, is yet to be established. We aimed to investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention to prevent the recurrence of low back pain. METHODS: WalkBack was a two-armed, randomised controlled trial, which recruited adults (aged 18 years or older) from across Australia who had recently recovered from an episode of non-specific low back pain that was not attributed to a specific diagnosis, and which lasted for at least 24 h. Participants were randomly assigned to an individualised, progressive walking and education intervention facilitated by six sessions with a physiotherapist across 6 months or to a no treatment control group (1:1). The randomisation schedule comprised randomly permuted blocks of 4, 6, and 8 and was stratified by history of more than two previous episodes of low back pain and referral method. Physiotherapists and participants were not masked to allocation. Participants were followed for a minimum of 12 months and a maximum of 36 months, depending on the date of enrolment. The primary outcome was days to the first recurrence of an activity-limiting episode of low back pain, collected in the intention-to-treat population via monthly self-report. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated from the societal perspective and expressed as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. The trial was prospectively registered (ACTRN12619001134112). FINDINGS: Between Sept 23, 2019, and June 10, 2022, 3206 potential participants were screened for eligibility, 2505 (78%) were excluded, and 701 were randomly assigned (351 to the intervention group and 350 to the no treatment control group). Most participants were female (565 [81%] of 701) and the mean age of participants was 54 years (SD 12). The intervention was effective in preventing an episode of activity-limiting low back pain (hazard ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·60-0·85], p=0·0002). The median days to a recurrence was 208 days (95% CI 149-295) in the intervention group and 112 days (89-140) in the control group. The incremental cost per QALY gained was AU$7802, giving a 94% probability that the intervention was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $28 000. Although the total number of participants experiencing at least one adverse event over 12 months was similar between the intervention and control groups (183 [52%] of 351 and 190 [54%] of 350, respectively, p=0·60), there was a greater number of adverse events related to the lower extremities in the intervention group than in the control group (100 in the intervention group and 54 in the control group). INTERPRETATION: An individualised, progressive walking and education intervention significantly reduced low back pain recurrence. This accessible, scalable, and safe intervention could affect how low back pain is managed. FUNDING: National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia.

Effectiveness of exercise programs to reduce low back pain among nurses and nursing assistants: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Nurses have a high prevalence of low back pain due to ergonomic hazards in healthcare workplaces. While exercise programs have been suggested as an intervention strategy, the effectiveness of low back pain programs has been inconsistent in the research literature. The purpose of study is to determine the effect of exercise programs to reduce low back pain among nursing staff. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted with five databases and systematically searched. Following the PRISMA guidelines, included studies evaluated low back pain relief among nurses or nursing assistants and described the exercise program. Two reviewers independently appraised, extracted, and synthesized all available studies. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022359511). RESULTS: A total of 296 articles with 1,355 nursing staff from nine countries were obtained. Nine randomized controlled trials with a moderate to low risk of bias quality were included. Exercise programs had a small but significant effect on low back pain of nursing staff (SMD = -0.48; 95% CI = -0.76 to -0.19; p = 0.03, I2 = 62%, p = 0.001). A subgroup analysis of nurses and nursing assistants showed moderate and small effects, respectively (I2 = 0% p < 0.0001, SMD -0.73 CI 95% [-0.97 to -0.48], p = 0.76, and I2 = 0% p = 0.002, SMD -0.23 CI 95% [-0.38 to -0.08], p < 0.88). Exercise for back and trunk exhibited a moderate effect on low back pain (SMD -0.56 CI 95% [-0.86 to -0.25], p = 0.01, I2 = 66%, p < 0.0004). A subgroup analysis comparing age, under 40 years old revealed a moderate effect size (SMD = -0.59; 95% CI = -0.83to -0.35; p = 0.06; I2 = 64%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Exercise programs are an effective treatment to reduce low back pain in nurses and nursing assistants, especially among younger staff. PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Back and trunk exercise programs should be recommended for nursing staff with low back pain.

Low back pain prevention behaviors and beliefs among the Polish population in a cross-sectional survey.

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common problems of public health and creates a burden globally. The aim was to assess the Polish population's back pain prevention behaviors and beliefs and to examine how these health behaviors and beliefs vary across sociodemographic factors and physical activity. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was carried out among 208 randomly selected patients of the public general practitioner clinic. The differences in LBP-related beliefs and attitudes were determined due to participants' status of requiring or non-requiring LBP treatment. Results: More than half of the respondents did not engage in behaviors that protect against back pain. Individuals with higher education levels and those who exercised at least once a week were significantly more likely to adopt behaviors to protect their backs. Less than half of the participants reported having a workplace that was adequately prepared to protect against back pain, and only 35.1% of the participants reported receiving instruction while taking up work on how to avoid back pain while working. According to respondents' opinions, preventive actions are necessary to protect against back pain. Inappropriate exercises and stress can be contributors to back pain, with these opinions reported more often by women and participants with higher education levels. Participants who received treatment for LBP showed a significantly higher expression of behaviors to protect against back pain compared to participants who did not require treatment. However, there were no significant differences in participants' beliefs about back pain prevention between the group requiring LBP treatment and the group not requiring LBP treatment. Conclusion: The study provides valuable insights into the association between LBP treatment, back pain prevention behaviors, and beliefs, suggesting potential avenues for future research and intervention development. By addressing workplace ergonomics and promoting a culture of back health, it may be possible to reduce the burden of LBP in Poland.

Effect of exercise given to factory workers with ergonomics training on pain and functionality: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Exercise and manual therapy are used with pharmacological interventions to manage low back pain and prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders. However, the potential benefits of incorporating exercise and ergonomics training for factory workers experiencing low back pain have not been definitively established. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the impact of ergonomics training with exercises on pain, functionality, sleep, and fatigue among factory employees experiencing low back pain. METHODS: This research was conducted as a randomized controlled trial involving workers with back pain employed in a plastic molding factory in Gebze, Kocaeli. Both groups received ergonomics training, but only the experimental group was given exercise training inclusive of stretching and core stabilization exercises. The workers in the experimental group were instructed to perform the exercises regularly for three days a week over a period of eight weeks. The McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were used for pre-and post-treatment assessment. RESULTS: The ODI, FSS, PSQI, and MPQ scores were significantly reduced in both groups. In the intergroup comparison, the exercise group showed a significantly greater decrease in all test scores compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: The exercise group showed a statistically significant decrease in ODI, FSS, MPQ, and PSQI scores compared to the control group. This study demonstrated that exercise is a more effective practice than ergonomic training for factory workers suffering from chronic low back pain.

What have we learned about risk assessment and interventions to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders and support work participation?

OBJECTIVE: The Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health (SJWEH) was established half a century ago. This paper provides an overview of research on musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) published over these 50 years. Three themes are described: risk assessment, interventions to prevent work-related MSD, and interventions to support work participation. Finally, implications for future research are highlighted. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed for all papers on MSD published in SJWEH. Each paper was coded on several criteria including research topic, type of MSD, risk factor(s), and number of citations. Findings were tabulated, and discussions within the author team defined the main results and future research directions. RESULTS: The search resulted in 1056 papers, of which 474 were included. The most reported-on MSD was low-back pain (LBP, 18%) and the most reported-on work-related risk factors were physically demanding work (14%) and psychosocial factors (12%). Research has contributed to improving case definitions, refining work-related exposure criteria, and recognizing the varying importance of physical and psychosocial factors across different MSD. Research on the association between work-related risk factors and LBP continues to emerge. Effective interventions for prevention of MSD are characterised by sufficient exposure reduction, while supporting work participation requires integrating health care, with multidisciplinary actions directed at factors involving the worker, employer, and workplace. CONCLUSION: Research has provided valuable insights into risk assessment, interventions for preventing work-related MSD, and supporting work participation. Intervention studies remain warranted and new areas include adopting whole-system approaches to prevent work-related MSD and promoting the concept of musculoskeletal health.

Implementation of an integrated primary care prevention and management program for chronic low back pain (LBP): patient-reported outcomes and predictors of pain interference after six months.

BACKGROUND: Integrated primary care programs for patients living with chronic pain which are accessible, interdisciplinary, and patient-centered are needed for preventing chronicity and improving outcomes. Evaluation of the implementation and impact of such programs supports further development of primary care chronic pain management. This study examined patient-reported outcomes among individuals with low back pain (LBP) receiving care in a novel interdisciplinary primary care program. METHODS: Patients were referred by primary care physicians in four regions of Quebec, Canada, and eligible patients received an evidence-based interdisciplinary pain management program over a six-month period. Patients were screened for risk of chronicity. Patient-reported outcome measures of pain interference and intensity, physical function, depression, and anxiety were evaluated at regular intervals over the six-month follow-up. A multilevel regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between patient characteristics at baseline, including risk of chronicity, and change in pain outcomes. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-four individuals (mean age 55.4y, 63% female) completed the program. The majority (≥ 60%) experienced a clinically meaningful improvement in pain intensity and interference at six months. Patients with moderate (71%) or high risk (81%) of chronicity showed greater improvement in pain interference than those with low risk (51%). Significant predictors of improvement in pain interference included a higher risk of chronicity, younger age, female sex, and lower baseline disability. CONCLUSION: The outcomes of this novel LBP program will inform wider implementation considerations by identifying key components for further effectiveness, sustainability, and scale-up of the program.

Effectiveness of Back care education Programme among school children: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review of Randomised controlled trials. OBJECTIVES: With the increasing incidence of back pain among children and its untold implications to their future, back education tailored in an effective way would be indicated. However literature appears unsettled. This study aims to review available literature to determine the effect of school-based back education in preventing and managing low back pain in school children. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials carried out on elementary and secondary school children of ages 6 to 18 years and published in English language were included. Back education taught in hospitals or other settings were excluded. Primary outcome was back pain prevalence and secondary outcomes were constituted from the study characteristics of selected studies which includes: back behavior, knowledge, postural habits, physical activity, fear-avoidance beliefs, back pack carriage, pain intensity, skills and self efficacy. Databases searched were PEDro, HINARI, PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. Available stiudies from 2000 to March 2022 were retrieved. Quality of studies were assessed using the PEDro scale. Obtained studies were descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: A total 8420 studies were retrieved and 8 studies (with 1239 participants) were included in this review. Four studies each assessed back knowledge and back behavior, and two assessed back pain prevalence. There were improvements in back knowledge and back behaviour, but effectiveness of back care education on back pain prevalence was not conclusive. Forms of education used involved the indirect method of conditioning the environment and the direct method which made use of theory, practical lessons and educational books and materials. CONCLUSION: Back care education programmes in schools are effective in improving back care knowledge, behavior and reduction in low back pain frequency. Reduction in back pain prevalence is not conclusive. Back care education could be incorporated as part of schools' education programmes. Limitations include exclusion of non English language studies and inconsistent outcome measures. FUNDING SOURCE: None. REGISTRATION: This review protocol was registered under the International platform of Registered systematic review and meta-analysis protocol (INPLASY) with the registration number; INPLASY202310044 and DOI number; https://doi.org/10.37766/inplasy2023.1.0044.

[Low Back Pain - Value of Prevention and Physiotherapy?] / Rückenschmerzen.

Low Back Pain - Value of Prevention and Physiotherapy? Abstract. Physiotherapy plays a central role in the prevention and treatment of lumbar back pain. There is no clear evidence in science on the effectiveness of individual preventive measures; however, movement and active training as central elements are indispensable here. In the treatment of lumbar back pain, however, the picture is clear: while passive measures such as heat or cold applications as well as ultrasound and electrotherapy should no longer be used alone due to the lack of evidence, the combination of active exercises and patient education shows promising success. If these are supplemented by sporadically applied manual therapy methods, the result is an evidence-based management of both acute and chronic lumbar back pain. One example of a successful implementation of current evidence for the treatment of back pain is GLA:D®, which is also in use in Switzerland since 2021.

Occupational low back pain prevention capacity of nurses in China: A multicenter cross-sectional study.

Introduction: Nurses have a high prevalence of occupational low back pain, especially since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has increased the nurses' workloads. It has brought a huge burden on nurses and their professional development. Nurses' occupational low back pain prevention capacity is the logical starting point and core of interventions to prevent its occurrence. To date, there is no study investigating it with a scientific scale. Therefore, a multicenter cross-sectional study was conducted to explore the current status of nurses' capacity in occupational low back pain prevention and its influencing factors in China. Methods: Using a two-stage, purposive and convenience mixed sampling method, 1331 nurses from 8 hospitals across 5 provinces (Hubei, Zhejiang, Shandong, Henan, and Sichuan) in the southern, western, northern, and central areas of mainland China were involved in this study. The demographic questionnaire and occupational low back pain prevention behavior questionnaire were used for data collection. The descriptive analysis, univariate analysis, and multiple stepwise linear regression were used for data analysis. Results: The results showed that the occupational low back pain prevention behavior questionnaire score was 89.00 (80.00, 103.00) [M (Q1, Q3)], which indicated that nurses' ability was at a moderate level. Participation in prevention training before, perceived stress at work, and working hours per week were predictors for nurses' occupational low back pain prevention capacity. Discussion: To improve nurses' prevention ability, nursing managers should organize various training programs, strengthen regulations to reduce nurses' workload and stress, provide a healthy workplace, and offer incentives to motivate nurses.