Hand Posture and Force Estimation Using Surface Electromyography and an Artificial Neural Network.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop an approach to predict hand posture (pinch versus grip) and grasp force using forearm surface electromyography (sEMG) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) during tasks that varied repetition rate and duty cycle. BACKGROUND: Prior studies have used electromyography with machine learning models to predict grip force but relatively few studies have assessed whether both hand posture and force can be predicted, particularly at varying levels of duty cycle and repetition rate. METHOD: Fourteen individuals participated in this experiment. sEMG data for five forearm muscles and force output data were collected. Calibration data (25, 50, 75, 100% of maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)) were used to train ANN models to predict hand posture (pinch versus grip) and force magnitude while performing tasks that varied load, repetition rate, and duty cycle. RESULTS: Across all participants, overall hand posture prediction accuracy was 79% (0.79 ± .08), whereas overall hand force prediction accuracy was 73% (0.73 ± .09). Accuracy ranged between 0.65 and 0.93 based on varying repetition rate and duty cycle. CONCLUSION: Hand posture and force prediction were possible using sEMG and ANNs, though there were important differences in the accuracy of predictions based on task characteristics including duty cycle and repetition rate. APPLICATION: The results of this study could be applied to the development of a dosimeter used for distal upper extremity biomechanical exposure measurement, risk assessment, job (re)design, and return to work programs.

Is there a u-shaped relationship between load levels and fatigue and recovery? An examination of possible mechanisms.

In a previous study, an unexpected u-shaped relationship was observed between load level and fatigue/recovery responses. Moderate load levels resulted in lower perceived discomfort, pain, and fatigue, and shorter recovery times compared to either low or high load levels. This phenomenon has been reported in other studies, but no article has examined the possible mechanisms that might explain this u-shaped relationship. In this paper, we re-examined the previously published data and found that the phenomenon does not appear to be due to the experimental artefact; the u-shape may be due to unexpectedly lower fatigue effects at moderate loads, and higher fatigue effects at lower loads. We then conducted a literature review and identified several possible physiological, perceptual, and biomechanical explanatory mechanisms. No single mechanism explains the entirety of the phenomenon. Further research is needed on the relationship between work exposures, fatigue, and recovery, and the mechanisms related to the u-shaped relationship.Practitioner summary: We examine a previously observed u-shaped relationship between load level and fatigue/recovery, where moderate force resulted in lower perceived fatigue and shorter recovery times. A u-shaped fatigue response suggests that simply minimising load levels might not be an optimal approach to reduce the risk of workplace injuries.

Occupational risk factors for work disability following carpal tunnel syndrome: a pooled prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Although recent studies have identified important risk factors associated with incident carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), risk factors associated with its severity have not been well explored. OBJECTIVE: To examine the associations between personal, workplace psychosocial and biomechanical factors and incident work disability among workers with CTS. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2010 five research groups conducted coordinated prospective studies of CTS and related work disability among US workers from various industries. Workers with prevalent or incident CTS (N=372) were followed for up to 6.4 years. Incident work disability was measured as: (1) change in work pace or work quality, (2) lost time or (3) job change following the development of CTS. Psychosocial factors were assessed by questionnaire. Biomechanical exposures were assessed by observation and measurements and included force, repetition, duty cycle and posture. HRs were estimated using Cox models. RESULTS: Disability incidence rates per 100 person-years were 33.2 for changes in work pace or quality, 16.3 for lost time and 20.0 for job change. There was a near doubling of risk for job change among those in the upper tertile of the Hand Activity Level Scale (HR 2.17; 95% CI 1.17 to 4.01), total repetition rate (HR 1.75; 95% CI 1.02 to 3.02), % time spent in all hand exertions (HR 2.20; 95% CI 1.21 to 4.01) and a sixfold increase for high job strain. Sensitivity analyses indicated attenuation due to inclusion of the prevalent CTS cases. CONCLUSION: Personal, biomechanical and psychosocial job factors predicted CTS-related disability. Results suggest that prevention of severe disability requires a reduction of both biomechanical and organisational work stressors.

Evaluating Different Measures of Low Back Pain Among U.S. Manual Materials Handling Workers: Comparisons of Demographic, Psychosocial, and Job Physical Exposure.

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in demographic, psychosocial, and job physical exposure risk factors between multiple low back pain (LBP) outcomes in a prospective cohort of industrial workers. BACKGROUND: LBP remains a leading cause of lost industrial productivity. Different case definitions involving pain (general LBP), medication use (M-LBP), seeking healthcare (H-LBP), and lost time (L-LBP) are often used to study LBP outcomes. However, the relationship between these outcomes remains unclear. METHOD: Demographic, health status, psychosocial, and job physical exposure risk factors were quantified for 635 incident-eligible industrial workers. Incident cases of LBP outcomes and pain symptoms were quantified and compared across the four outcomes. RESULTS: Differences in age, gender, medical history, and LBP history were found between the four outcomes. Most incident-eligible workers (67%) suffered an LBP outcome during follow-up. Cases decreased from 420 for LBP (25.4 cases/100 person-years) to 303 for M-LBP (22.0 cases/100 person-years), to 151 for H-LBP (15.6 cases/100 person-years), and finally to 56 for L-LBP (8.7 cases/100 person-years). Conversely, pain intensity and duration increased from LBP to H-LBP. However, pain duration was relatively lower for L-LBP than for H-LBP. CONCLUSION: Patterns of cases, pain intensity, and pain duration suggest the influence of the four outcomes. However, few differences in apparent risk factors were observed between the outcomes. Further research is needed to establish consistent case definitions. APPLICATION: Knowledge of patterns between different LBP outcomes can improve interpretation of research and guide future research and intervention studies in industry.

Psychometric evaluation of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) in patients with orthopedic shoulder impairments seeking outpatient rehabilitation.

STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional, observational study. INTRODUCTION: The disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) questionnaire is an upper-extremity specific outcome measure commonly used in routine clinical care and clinical trials. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: Our purposes were to: (1) examine the psychometric properties of the DASH questionnaire using factor analysis, one- and two-parameter item response theory models, and (2) develop a functional staging map illustrating the relationships between the item difficulty hierarchy of the DASH items and the patient's DASH total score. METHODS: Data from 2724 patients with orthopedic shoulder impairments seeking outpatient physical therapy in 79 clinics in the US were analyzed. RESULTS: Factor analysis supported a general factor, explaining 62.2% of the total variance. The coverage of DASH items was suitable for patients with shoulder impairments with no ceiling or floor effect. Endorsed items representing the most difficult items were related to feeling less capable, executing recreational activities with force or impact, and performing recreational activities in which you move your arm freely. Items with higher discriminating abilities were those related to do heavy household chores, garden/yard work, and change a light bulb overhead. With a separation index equaled to 4.94, the DASH can differentiate persons into at least 6 statistically distinct person strata. None of the DASH items exhibited differential item functioning by gender or symptom acuity, except two items by age group. DISCUSSION: Besides a total (summed) final score obtained from a specific measure, the keyform and functional staging plots/maps can be used to assist clinicians in clinical interpretation of the scores. CONCLUSIONS: Results supported the clinical usage of the DASH questionnaire in patients with orthopedic shoulder impairments seeking outpatient rehabilitation.

Validation of the Revised Strain Index for Predicting Risk of Incident Carpal Tunnel Syndrome in a Prospective Cohort.

The Revised Strain Index (RSI), a model that quantifies physical exposure from individual hand/wrist exertions, tasks, and multi-task jobs, was used to quantify exposure for 1372 incident-eligible manufacturing, service and healthcare workers. Workers were followed for an average of 2.5 years (maximum 6 years) and had an average carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence rate of 4.6 per 100 person-years. Exceeding the a-priori RSI limit of 10.0 showed increased risk of CTS (Hazard Ratio (HR) = 1.45, 95% CI: 1.11-1.91, p = 0.01). There also was a dose-response relationship using proposed low (RSI ≤ 8.5, HR = 1.00), medium (HR = 1.42 (95% CI: 0.96-2.09, p = 0.08)), and high limits (RSI > 15, HR = 1.79 (95% CI: 1.19-2.69, p = 0.01), respectively. RSI as a continuous variable showed CTS risk increased steadily by between 1.9% and 3.3% per unit increase in RSI (p ≤ 0.03). These results suggest that the RSI is a useful tool for surveillance as well as for job intervention/design and continuous improvement processes.Practitioner Summary The Revised Strain Index (RSI) quantifies physical exposure from individual hand/wrist exertions, tasks, and multi-task jobs. Increased cumulative RSI scores (i.e. daily exposure score) are associated with increased risk of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The RSI is potentially useful as a risk surveillance and intervention design tool.

Prevalence of low back pain, seeking medical care, and lost time due to low back pain among manual material handling workers in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem throughout the United States. To achieve a greater understanding of the occupational risk factors, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) funded a low back health effects consortium, which performed several surveillance studies throughout the United States. This study combines data from the consortium research groups resulting in a data set with nearly 2000 workers in various regions of the country. The purpose of this paper is to examine prevalence and personal risk factors of low back health effects among these workers. METHODS: There were three common questions regarding history of low back health effects in the past 12 months including 1) have you had LBP lasting 7 days, 2) have you sought medical care for LBP, and 3) have you taken time off work due to LBP. The questionnaire included demographic questions. There were five data collections institutions or sites including NIOSH, Ohio State University, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Texas A&M University, and University of Utah. RESULTS: The 12-month period prevalence of low back pain lasting 7 days, seeking medical care, and lost time due to LBP were 25, 14 and 10%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age or weight between cases and non-cases for any prevalence measure. The height of workers was significantly greater in the cases compared to non-cases for all three prevalence definitions. There were significant differences among the sites on the prevalence of seeking medical care for LBP and lost time due to LBP. The Ohio State University had significantly higher prevalence rates for seeking medical care and lost time due to LBP than University of Wisconsin, University of Utah, or Texas A&M University. CONCLUSION: LBP, the least severe low back health effect studied, had the highest prevalence (25%) and lost time due to LBP, the most severe low back health effect studied, had the lowest prevalence (10%) among nearly 2000 US manual material handling workers. There was a significant site or regional influence in prevalence rates for seeking medical care and lost time due to LBP.

Between-side differences in hand-grip strength across the age span: Findings from 2011-2014 NHANES and 2011 NIH Toolbox studies.

This project was undertaken to describe percentage differences in the grip strength between the dominant and nondominant-sides of left- and right-handed males and females across the age span. Data used in the project were from population-based samples of participants: 13,653 from the 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and 3,571 from the 2011 normative phase of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Toolbox project. Depending on how percentage differences were calculated, the overall grip strength was a mean 5.0-5.6% greater on the dominant than nondominant side. The percentage differences were significantly greater for individuals who were right-hand dominant rather than left-hand dominant. The differences also varied according to gender. We present summary data for percentage differences stratified by study, handedness, and gender. The values can be used to determine whether grip strength on one side is limited relative to the other.

Modeling the Effect of the 2018 Revised ACGIH® Hand Activity Threshold Limit Value® (TLV) at Reducing Risk for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.

Recent studies have shown the 2001 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH®) Threshold Limit Value (TLV®) for Hand Activity was not sufficiently protective for workers at risk of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). These studies led to a revision of the TLV and Action Limit. This study compares the effect of applying the 2018 TLV vs. the 2001 TLV to predict incident CTS within a large occupational pooled cohort study (n = 4,321 workers). Time from study enrollment to first occurrence of CTS was modeled using Cox proportional hazard regression. Adjusted and unadjusted hazard ratios for incident CTS were calculated using three exposure categories: below the Action Limit, between the Action Limit and TLV, and above the TLV. Workers exposed above the 2001 Action Limit demonstrated significant excess risk of carpal tunnel syndrome, while the 2018 TLV demonstrated significant excess risk only above the TLV. Of 186 total cases of CTS, 52 cases occurred among workers exposed above the 2001 TLV vs. 100 among those exposed above the 2018 value. Eliminating exposures above the 2001 TLV might have prevented 11.2% of all cases of CTS seen in our pooled cohort, vs. 25.1% of cases potentially prevented by keeping exposures below the 2018 value. The 2018 revision of the TLV better protects workers from CTS, a recognized occupational health indicator important to public health. A significant number of workers are currently exposed to forceful repetitive hand activity above these guidelines. Public health professionals should promulgate these new guidelines and encourage employers to reduce hand intensive exposures to prevent CTS and other musculoskeletal disorders.

Summary of grip strength measurements obtained in the 2011-2012 and 2013-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional and descriptive study. INTRODUCTION: Supported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) began collecting grip strength data from nationally representative samples in 2011. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To examine the stability of the grip strength values across 2 data release cycles and provide updated US population-based grip strength values for 6 to 80 year olds. METHODS: Handgrip data from 13,676 participants aged 6-80 years were extracted from the NHANES 2011-2014 database. The muscle strength/grip test component measured the isometric grip strength using a Takei digital handgrip dynamometer (Takei Scientific Instruments, Shinagawa-Ku, Tokyo). Grip strength values (best of 3 trials for each hand) were summarized by gender, dominant side, and age group. Grip data from 2 data release cycles (2011-2012 vs 2013-2014) were compared. RESULTS: Differences between 2 data release cycles were negligible. Hence, we summarize grip strength values across the entire 2011-2014 period. The mean grip strength ranged from 50.3 kg for the dominant hand of 30- to 34-year-old men to 10.0 kg for the nondominant hand of 6-year-old girls. DISCUSSION: The summary data we present provide relatively current reference values to which tested individuals can be compared. However, clinicians and/or researchers should be aware that the instrumentation and procedures may influence the values. CONCLUSIONS: Results supported the stability of the NHANES grip strength values across data release cycles.

Medium-term effects of a two-desk sit/stand workstation on cognitive performance and workload for healthy people performing sedentary work: a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

Implementing sit/stand workstations in sedentary work environments is a common way to reduce sedentary time, but their medium-term effect on cognitive performance is unclear. To address this circumstance, eighteen office workers participated in a two-arm, randomised controlled cross-over trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02825303), either working at a traditional (sit) or an interventional (sit/stand) workplace for 23 weeks. Cognitive performance (working speed, reaction time, concentration performance, accuracy), workload and relevant covariates (salivary cortisol level, heart rate, physical activity, sitting time) were measured pre- and post-intervention under laboratory conditions. MANOVA and RMANOVA results did not show differences in performance parameters and workload, respectively, between sit/stand and traditional workplace users. Differences in text editing accuracy and cortisol levels for sit/stand workstation users indicate potential connectivity to cognitive parameters which should be further examined with large-scale studies. Practitioner summary: Medium-term effects of working at sit/stand workstations on cognitive performance and workload are unexplored. This randomised controlled trial suggests that cognitive performance and workload are unaffected for sit/stand workstation users after 23 weeks of use. However, accuracy appeared to improve and physiological stress appeared to be altered. Abbreviations: BMI: body mass index; IPAQ: International physical activity questionnaire; MET: metabolic equivalent of task; MANOVA: multivariate ANOVA; NASA TLX: NASA task load index; RMANOVA: repeated measures ANOVA.

Incident CTS in a large pooled cohort study: associations obtained by a Job Exposure Matrix versus associations obtained from observed exposures.

BACKGROUND: There is growing use of a job exposure matrix (JEM) to provide exposure estimates in studies of work-related musculoskeletal disorders; few studies have examined the validity of such estimates, nor did compare associations obtained with a JEM with those obtained using other exposures. OBJECTIVE: This study estimated upper extremity exposures using a JEM derived from a publicly available data set (Occupational Network, O*NET), and compared exposure-disease associations for incident carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) with those obtained using observed physical exposure measures in a large prospective study. METHODS: 2393 workers from several industries were followed for up to 2.8 years (5.5 person-years). Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) codes were assigned to the job at enrolment. SOC codes linked to physical exposures for forceful hand exertion and repetitive activities were extracted from O*NET. We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models to describe exposure-disease associations for incident CTS for individually observed physical exposures and JEM exposures from O*NET. RESULTS: Both exposure methods found associations between incident CTS and exposures of force and repetition, with evidence of dose-response. Observed associations were similar across the two methods, with somewhat wider CIs for HRs calculated using the JEM method. CONCLUSION: Exposures estimated using a JEM provided similar exposure-disease associations for CTS when compared with associations obtained using the 'gold standard' method of individual observation. While JEMs have a number of limitations, in some studies they can provide useful exposure estimates in the absence of individual-level observed exposures.

Is sleep position associated with glenohumeral shoulder pain and rotator cuff tendinopathy: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral pain and rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCT) are common musculoskeletal complaints with high prevalence among working populations. The primary proposed pathophysiologic mechanisms are sub-acromial RC tendon impingement and reduced tendon blood flow. Some sleep postures may increase subacromial pressure, potentially contributing to these postulated mechanisms. This study uses a large population of workers to investigate whether there is an association between preferred sleeping position and prevalence of: (1) shoulder pain, and (2) rotator cuff tendinopathy. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was performed on baseline data from a multicenter prospective cohort study. Participants were 761 workers who were evaluated by questionnaire using a body diagram to determine the presence of glenohumeral pain within 30 days prior to enrollment. The questionnaire also assessed primary and secondary preferred sleep position(s) using 6 labeled diagrams. All workers underwent a structured physical examination to determine whether RCT was present. For this study, the case definition of RCT was glenohumeral pain plus at least one of a positive supraspinatus test, painful arc and/or Neer's test. Prevalence of glenohumeral pain and RCT were individually calculated for the primary and secondary sleep postures and odds ratios were calculated. RESULTS: Age, sex, Framingham cardiovascular risk score and BMI had significant associations with glenohumeral pain. For rotator cuff tendinopathy, increasing age, Framingham risk score and Hand Activity Level (HAL) showed significant associations. The sleep position anticipated to have the highest risk of glenohumeral pain and RCT was paradoxically associated with a decreased prevalence of glenohumeral pain and also trended toward being protective for RCT. Multivariable logistic regression showed no further significant associations. CONCLUSION: This cross-sectional study unexpectedly found a reduced association between one sleep posture and glenohumeral pain. This cross-sectional study may be potentially confounded, by participants who are prone to glenohumeral pain and RCT may have learned to avoid sleeping in the predisposing position. Longitudinal studies are needed to further evaluate a possible association between glenohumeral pain or RCT and sleep posture as a potential risk factor.

Risk assessments using the Strain Index and the TLV for HAL, Part II: Multi-task jobs and prevalence of CTS.

The Strain Index (SI) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) threshold limit value for hand activity level (TLV for HAL) have been shown to be associated with prevalence of distal upper-limb musculoskeletal disorders such as carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The SI and TLV for HAL disagree on more than half of task exposure classifications. Similarly, time-weighted average (TWA), peak, and typical exposure techniques used to quantity physical exposure from multi-task jobs have shown between-technique agreement ranging from 61% to 93%, depending upon whether the SI or TLV for HAL model was used. This study compared exposure-response relationships between each model-technique combination and prevalence of CTS. Physical exposure data from 1,834 workers (710 with multi-task jobs) were analyzed using the SI and TLV for HAL and the TWA, typical, and peak multi-task job exposure techniques. Additionally, exposure classifications from the SI and TLV for HAL were combined into a single measure and evaluated. Prevalent CTS cases were identified using symptoms and nerve-conduction studies. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to quantify exposure-response relationships between categorized (i.e., low, medium, and high) physical exposure and CTS prevalence for all model-technique combinations, and for multi-task workers, mono-task workers, and all workers combined. Except for TWA TLV for HAL, all model-technique combinations showed monotonic increases in risk of CTS with increased physical exposure. The combined-models approach showed stronger association than the SI or TLV for HAL for multi-task workers. Despite differences in exposure classifications, nearly all model-technique combinations showed exposure-response relationships with prevalence of CTS for the combined sample of mono-task and multi-task workers. Both the TLV for HAL and the SI, with the TWA or typical techniques, appear useful for epidemiological studies and surveillance. However, the utility of TWA, typical, and peak techniques for job design and intervention is dubious.

Assessing manual dexterity: Comparing the WorkAbility Rate of Manipulation Test with the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. INTRODUCTION: The WorkAbility Rate of Manipulation Test (WRMT), an adaptation of the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test (MMDT), contains a revised board and protocols to improve its utility for therapy or fitness assessment. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To describe the development and preliminary psychometric properties of WRMT. METHODS: Sixty-six healthy participants completed MMDT and WRMT in a random order followed by a user experience survey. We compared tests using repeated-measures analysis of variance, test-retest reliability, and examined agreement between tests. RESULTS: Despite the similarities of these 2 instruments, the different administration protocols resulted in statistically different score distributions (P < .001). Results supported good test-retest reliability of WRMT (placing test ICC = 0.88-0.90 and turning test ICC = 0.68-0.82). The WRMT correlated moderately with MMDT (r = 0.81 in placing test and r = 0.44-0.57 in turning test). Bland-Altman plot showed that the differences in completion time were 3.8 seconds between placing tests and 19.6 (both hands), 0.3 (right hand), and 3.9 (left hand) seconds between turning tests. Overall, participants felt that the instruction of WRMT was easier to follow (44%) and preferred its setup, color, and depth of the test board (49%). Time required to complete 1 panel of 20 disks correlated highly with the time needed to finish a complete trial of 60 disks in both MMDT (r = 0.91-0.97) and WRMT (r = 0.88-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: Caution is warranted in comparing scores from these 2 test variants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b.

Effect of alternating postures on cognitive performance for healthy people performing sedentary work.

Prolonged sitting is a risk factor for several diseases and the prevalence of worksite-based interventions such as sit-to-stand workstations is increasing. Although their impact on sedentary behaviour has been regularly investigated, the effect of working in alternating body postures on cognitive performance is unclear. To address this uncertainty, 45 students participated in a two-arm, randomised controlled cross-over trial under laboratory conditions. Subjects executed validated cognitive tests (working speed, reaction time, concentration performance) either in sitting or alternating working postures on two separate days (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02863731). MANOVA results showed no significant difference in cognitive performance between trials executed in alternating, standing or sitting postures. Perceived workload did not differ between sitting and alternating days. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed significant learning effects regarding concentration performance and working speed for both days. These results suggest that working posture did not affect cognitive performance in the short term. Practitioner Summary: Prior reports indicated health-related benefits based on alternated (sit/stand) body postures. Nevertheless, their effect on cognitive performance is unknown. This randomised controlled trial showed that working in alternating body postures did not influence reaction time, concentration performance, working speed or workload perception in the short term.

Association between wrist ratio and carpal tunnel syndrome: Effect modification by body mass index.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have reported higher wrist ratios (WR) related to carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) but have not assessed effect modification by obesity and may have inadequately controlled for confounders. METHODS: Baseline data of a multicenter prospective cohort study were analyzed. CTS was defined by nerve conduction study (NCS) criteria and symptoms. RESULTS: Among the 1,206 participants, a square-shaped wrist was associated with CTS after controlling for confounders (prevalence ratio = 2.27; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.33-3.86). Body mass index (BMI) was a strong effect modifier on the relationship between WR and both CTS and abnormal NCS results, with normal weight strata of rectangular versus square wrists = 8.18 (95% CI, 1.63-49.96) and 7.12 (95% CI, 2.19-23.16), respectively. DISCUSSION: A square wrist is significantly associated with CTS after controlling for confounders. Effect modification by high BMI masked the eightfold magnitude adjusted relationship seen between WR and CTS among normal weight participants. Muscle Nerve 56: 1047-1053, 2017.

Association between Epicondylitis and Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Pooled Occupational Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of lateral epicondylitis (LE) is unclear. Recent evidence suggests some common musculoskeletal disorders may have a basis in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. Thus, we examined CVD risks as potential LE risks. METHODS: Workers (n = 1824) were enrolled in two large prospective studies and underwent structured interviews and physical examinations at baseline. Analysis of pooled baseline data assessed the relationships separately between a modified Framingham Heart Study CVD risk score and three prevalence outcomes of: 1) lateral elbow pain, 2) positive resisted wrist or middle finger extension, and 3) a combination of both symptoms and at least one resisted maneuver. Quantified job exposures, personal and psychosocial confounders were statistically controlled. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: There was a strong relationship between CVD risk score and lateral elbow symptoms, resisted wrist or middle finger extension and LE after adjustment for confounders. The adjusted ORs for symptoms were as high as 3.81 (95% CI 2.11, 6.85), for positive examination with adjusted odds ratios as high as 2.85 (95% CI 1.59, 5.12) and for combined symptoms and physical examination 6.20 (95% CI 2.04, 18.82). Relationships trended higher with higher CVD risk scores. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest a potentially modifiable disease mechanism for LE.

Sit-To-Stand Lift: Effects of Lifted Height on Weight Borne and Upper Extremity Strength Requirements.

To prevent back and shoulder injuries to nursing personnel, sit-to-stand lifts are used to transfer partial-weight-bearing patients with upper extremity strength. However, the weight-bearing capacity and upper extremity strength required of patients have not been defined. The objectives of this study were to determine: (a) the percentage of body weight borne by the patient when lifted to different heights in the lift and (b) whether a patient needs upper extremity strength. Nineteen healthy normal-weight volunteers (ages 19-39) were transferred from a hospital bed to a wheelchair using (a) a gait belt and (b) a sit-to-stand lift. With legs secured in the lift, participants were lifted to five different heights (knee angles 120-180 degrees) while holding and not holding the lift handles. Participants supported a greater percentage of body weight as they were lifted higher, increasing from 60% to almost 100% (p < .01). Holding the handles did not have an effect on weight borne overall. At low heights, slightly less weight was borne when not using the handles than with them, and no difference in weight borne was found at heights near standing (p < .01). All participants felt more comfortable and safer transferring from bed to wheelchair with the mechanical lift than with the gait belt (p < .01). Results are limited to normal-weight patients but suggest that sit-stand lifts can be used in patients without upper extremity strength. Patients with limited weight-bearing capacity can be transferred by not raising them high in the lift. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Risk assessments using the Strain Index and the TLV for HAL, Part I: Task and multi-task job exposure classifications.

BACKGROUND: The Strain Index (SI) and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Value for Hand Activity Level (TLV for HAL) use different constituent variables to quantify task physical exposures. Similarly, time-weighted-average (TWA), Peak, and Typical exposure techniques to quantify physical exposure from multi-task jobs make different assumptions about each task's contribution to the whole job exposure. Thus, task and job physical exposure classifications differ depending upon which model and technique are used for quantification. This study examines exposure classification agreement, disagreement, correlation, and magnitude of classification differences between these models and techniques. METHODS: Data from 710 multi-task job workers performing 3,647 tasks were analyzed using the SI and TLV for HAL models, as well as with the TWA, Typical and Peak job exposure techniques. Physical exposures were classified as low, medium, and high using each model's recommended, or a priori limits. Exposure classification agreement and disagreement between models (SI, TLV for HAL) and between job exposure techniques (TWA, Typical, Peak) were described and analyzed. RESULTS: Regardless of technique, the SI classified more tasks as high exposure than the TLV for HAL, and the TLV for HAL classified more tasks as low exposure. The models agreed on 48.5% of task classifications (kappa = 0.28) with 15.5% of disagreement between low and high exposure categories. Between-technique (i.e., TWA, Typical, Peak) agreement ranged from 61-93% (kappa: 0.16-0.92) depending on whether the SI or TLV for HAL was used. CONCLUSIONS: There was disagreement between the SI and TLV for HAL and between the TWA, Typical and Peak techniques. Disagreement creates uncertainty for job design, job analysis, risk assessments, and developing interventions. Task exposure classifications from the SI and TLV for HAL might complement each other. However, TWA, Typical, and Peak job exposure techniques all have limitations. Part II of this article examines whether the observed differences between these models and techniques produce different exposure-response relationships for predicting prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome.