METHODS: The SB and MPTD activities were performed by seven nurses on a simulated patient. The nurses' facial expressions were recorded during the trial. The NASA Task Load Index and technology acceptance questionnaire were also assessed.
RESULTS: The MPTD significantly reduced the mean overall NASA-TLX score by 68.7% (p = 0.004) and increased the overall acceptance score (median = 8.30) by 21.2% (p = 0.016) when compared to the SB (median = 6.85). All the subjects reported positive feelings towards MPTD. However, facial expression analysis showed that the nurses had a significantly higher peak density of fear while using MPTD (p = 0.016). Besides, there was no improvement in the negative valence and contempt emotion compared to the SB.
CONCLUSION: Overall, nurses showed positive perceptions and acceptance of MPTD even when they experienced negative emotions.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe Motorised Patient Transfer Device (MPTD) reduced the perceived workload of nurses and showed a higher acceptance level compared to the commonly used baseline device (SB).Factors that attributed to the nurses' negative emotions can be used to improve technology and patient transfer processes.More training should be given to familiarise the health practitioners with the new assistive device to reduce their fear of technology.
Results: The findings showed piano players have a higher NDI, lower CVA, and RSP when compared with the non-piano players at a statistically significant level of p-value <0.05.
Objective: Playing-related musculoskeletal disorders (PRMSD) are a common problem for the pianist. The poor upper body ergonomics influences the natural positioning of the neck and shoulders, which involves forward head posture (FHP) and rounded shoulder posture (RSP). This misaligned position could produce a sensation of pain over the upper body, which affects the piano player and computer users with similar ergonomic posture. Recently, photogrammetry methods are commonly applied in a clinical setting to assess posture. The goal of this research is to compare the upper body playing-related muscu-loskeletal disorders between the piano and the non-piano players by applying photogrammetry.
Materials and Methods: This causal-comparative study includes 70 participants with 35 piano and 35 non-piano players. The participant's FHP was assessed using a digitized photo to record the Craniovertebral angle (CVA) with the support of Kinovea software. Besides, digital Vernier Calliper used to assess the scapular index on the RSP and Neck disability indices (NDI) used to measure neck pain and functional disability of the participants.
Aim: The present research was conducted to identify site-specific pain resulting from musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among practicing dentists and determine its impact on their quality of life.
Setting and Design: A cross-sectional questionnaire study conducted among practicing dentists of Puducherry Taluk, Puducherry, India.
Method and Materials: A closed-ended, self-administered questionnaire was distributed to 95 practicing dentists to identify site-specific MSP from the study subjects. Data on pain due to MSDs, frequency of pain, its impact on quality of life, relieving factors, patients attended per day, working hours per day, and awareness on ergonomics were also recorded.
Statistical Analyses: The data were analyzed for descriptive statistics, and Chi-square tests was used for proportions.
Results: Almost all respondents experienced pain due to MSDs. Approximately, 11.1% "always" experienced elbow pain; 5.6% "always" experienced pain in neck and back. Approximately, 83% "sometimes" experienced pain in the back. Pain in elbow was significantly associated with gender (P = 0.036), qualification (P = 0.029), and years of practice (P = 0.032). Approximately, 36% reported having an impact on their life.
Conclusion: The magnitude of the problem is slowly shifting from "sometimes" to "always." Although small in proportion, pain due to MSDs has an impact on dental practitioners' quality of life, and elbow pain was reportedly higher in the study setting. Measures need to be implemented before MSD becomes a career limiting occupational hazard.
PURPOSE: This review article aims to recapitulate the therapeutic potential of berberine and its mechanism of action in treating musculoskeletal disorders.
METHODS: A wide range of literature illustrating the effects of berberine in ameliorating musculoskeletal disorders was retrieved from online electronic databases (PubMed and Medline) and reviewed.
RESULTS: Berberine may potentially retard the progression of osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Limited studies reported the effects of berberine in suppressing the proliferation of osteosarcoma cells. These beneficial properties of berberine are mediated in part through its ability to target multiple signaling pathways, including PKA, p38 MAPK, Wnt/β-catenin, AMPK, RANK/RANKL/OPG, PI3K/Akt, NFAT, NF-κB, Hedgehog, and oxidative stress signaling. In addition, berberine exhibited anti-apoptotic, anti-inflammatory, and immunosuppressive properties.
CONCLUSION: The current evidence indicates that berberine may be effective in preventing musculoskeletal disorders. However, findings from in vitro and in vivo investigations await further validation from human clinical trial.
Materials and Methods: The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was sent out to all orthopaedic consultants and residents at two institutions in Singapore, via an email link to an online survey. Separately, further questions on symptom description, severity and treatment were surveyed. Additional information like age, gender, height and weight were obtained as well.
Results: A total of 87.5% respondents have at least one injury. Neck symptoms (66.1%) were the most prevalent, and back symptoms had the highest median severity score (4.5/10). The 74.1% of these injuries were reported as directly attributable to work. Age was found to be associated with an increase in the total number of anatomical areas affected (p = 0.016). A seated operating position was associated with more severe back pain (p = 0.040).
Conclusion: There is a high prevalence of occupational injuries sustained in our population of orthopaedic surgeons. Neck symptoms, followed by back and wrist symptoms, were the predominant symptoms in our population. Targeted ergonomic interventions may be considered to prevent specific musculoskeletal injuries in our population of orthopaedic surgeons.
METHODS: In this review, we first discussed the anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology of tendon and ligament injuries and its current treatment. Secondly, we explored the current role of tendon and ligament tissue engineering, describing its recent advances. After that, we also described stem cell and cell secreted product approaches in tendon and ligament injuries. Lastly, we examined the role of the bioreactor and mechanical loading in in vitro maturation of engineered tendon and ligament.
RESULTS: Tissue engineering offers various alternative ways of treatment from biological tissue constructs to stem cell therapy and cell secreted products. Bioreactor with mechanical stimulation is instrumental in preparing mature engineered tendon and ligament substitutes in vitro.
CONCLUSIONS: Tissue engineering showed great promise in replacing the damaged tendon and ligament. However, more study is needed to develop ideal engineered tendon and ligament.
METHOD: A cross-sectional study was conducted with convenience sampling employed across five different departments. The departments were a department of medical, surgical, orthopedics, emergency and rehabilitation. The samples were selected according to a minimum of two years of clinical experience without any history of low back surgery. An instrument consists of socio-demographic background, knowledge on body mechanics and Owestry Low Back Pain Disability Index Questionnaire was used in this study.
RESULTS: A total of 139 HCPs were recruited including medical officers, staff nurses, community health nurses, assistant medical officers, physiotherapists, and assistant nurses. A self-administered questionnaire pertaining to knowledge revealed that 73.4% of HCPs had inadequate knowledge of musculoskeletal body mechanics. Among all, 90.6% (minimal: 9.4%, moderate: 43.2%, severe: 42.4%, crippled: 5.0%) of HCPs showed moderate to crippled disability using Oswestry Disability Index classifications indicating the poor practice of body mechanics while working.
CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicate that a lack of knowledge among healthcare professionals lead to the inadequate practice of preserving musculoskeletal health while carrying out duty in caring patients. It is suggested that enforcing and emphasizing health education for healthcare professionals is urgently needed towards reducing the risk of the musculoskeletal problem among healthcare professionals.
METHODS: The study aimed to determine the incidence of MSD for school teachers in 15 primary schools in Kuala Lumpur during a 6-month period. Secondly, the study also sought to examine the relationships between psychosocial factors, depression and MSD among teachers. Thirdly, the study aimed to explore depression as mediator. The hypothesis addressed by this cross-sectional study was that depression would prove to be a mediator for the psychosocial factors affecting MSD.
RESULTS: The incidence of MSD during the previous 6 months was 80.1% (95% CI: 75.8-84.2%), with 80.5% of female and 77.5% of male teachers reporting symptomatic pain during that period. There were significant relationships between psychosocial factors, depression, and MSD. The results indicated that in relation to psychosocial factors, depression (r = - 0.25, p
OBJECTIVE: To review the prevalence of illness, stress, and corresponding risk factors among educators in Malaysia.
METHOD: Scopus, ProQuest, PubMed, ScienceDirect, CAB, and other computerized databases were searched according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies published between January 2013 and April 2019 on the prevalence and associated risk factors of illness and stress among educators (S1 Checklist). The keywords used included educator, teacher, lecturer, academic staff, teaching profession, university staff, academician, faculty, illness, injury, disease, pain, WMSD, dysphonia, hoarseness, stress, mental health, strain, health problem, disorder, and/or Malaysia. Selected studies were evaluated by quality assessment.
RESULTS: Twenty-two articles fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The prevalence of illness and stress was determined for low back pain (33.3-72.9%); upper back pain (33.33-56.4%); neck/shoulder pain (40.4-80.1%); upper arm discomfort (91.3%); forearm pain (89.6%); wrist pain (16.7-93.2%); hip pain (13.2-40.9%); thigh discomfort (91.8%); lower leg discomfort (90.5%); knee pain (23.7-88.0%); ankle/feet pain (19.3-87.7%); elbow pain (3.5-13.0%); voice disorder (10.4-13.0%) and stress (5.5-25.9%). Sex, education level, teaching experience, quality of life, anxiety, depression, coping styles, and others were reported as associated risk factors across the studies.
CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a cause for concern regarding musculoskeletal disorders, voice disorder, and stress reported among educators in Malaysia. While most risk factors matched those reported in studies elsewhere, others such as school characteristics (school level, government or private school, and location [rural/urban]) have not been investigated.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of physical, cognitive and organisational ergonomic interventions, or combinations of those interventions for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs among office workers.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science (Science Citation Index), SPORTDiscus, Embase, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health database, and the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, to 10 October 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of ergonomic interventions for preventing work-related upper limb or neck MSDs (or both) among office workers. We only included studies where the baseline prevalence of MSDs of the upper limb or neck, or both, was less than 25%.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We included studies with relevant data that we judged to be sufficiently homogeneous regarding the interventions and outcomes in the meta-analysis. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for each comparison using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 RCTs (2165 workers). We judged one study to have a low risk of bias and the remaining 14 studies to have a high risk of bias due to small numbers of participants and the potential for selection bias.Physical ergonomic interventionsThere is inconsistent evidence for arm supports and alternative computer mouse designs. There is moderate-quality evidence that an arm support with an alternative computer mouse (two studies) reduced the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs (risk ratio (RR) 0.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.99), but not the incidence of right upper limb MSDs (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.66); and low-quality evidence that this intervention reduced neck or shoulder discomfort (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.41; 95% CI -0.69 to -0.12) and right upper limb discomfort (SMD -0.34; 95% CI -0.63 to -0.06).There is moderate-quality evidence that the incidence of neck or shoulder and right upper limb disorders were not considerably reduced when comparing an alternative computer mouse and a conventional mouse (two studies; neck or shoulder: RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.19 to 2.00; right upper limb: RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.72), and also when comparing an arm support with a conventional mouse and a conventional mouse alone (two studies) (neck or shoulder: RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.12 to 6.98; right upper limb: RR 1.07; 95% CI 0.58 to 1.96).Workstation adjustment (one study) and sit-stand desks (one study) did not have an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort, compared to no intervention.Organisational ergonomic interventionsThere is very low-quality evidence that supplementary breaks (two studies) reduce discomfort of the neck (MD -0.25; 95% CI -0.40 to -0.11), right shoulder or upper arm (MD -0.33; 95% CI -0.46 to -0.19), and right forearm or wrist or hand (MD -0.18; 95% CI -0.29 to -0.08) among data entry workers.Training in ergonomic interventionsThere is low to very low-quality evidence in five studies that participatory and active training interventions may or may not prevent work-related MSDs of the upper limb or neck or both.Multifaceted ergonomic interventionsFor multifaceted interventions there is one study (very low-quality evidence) that showed no effect on any of the six upper limb pain outcomes measured in that study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found inconsistent evidence that the use of an arm support or an alternative mouse may or may not reduce the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs. For other physical ergonomic interventions there is no evidence of an effect. For organisational interventions, in the form of supplementary breaks, there is very low-quality evidence of an effect on upper limb discomfort. For training and multifaceted interventions there is no evidence of an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort. Further high-quality studies are needed to determine the effectiveness of these interventions among office workers.
METHOD: This study utilized a quantitative, nonexperimental, cross-sectional research design. A total of 60 subjects were randomly selected after passing the study's sampling criteria. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) was to used to determine common MSDs affecting the various regions in the body. The Demographic Pofile Sheet was provided to gather a subject's demographic characteristics.
RESULTS: Filipino migrant workers mostly complain of pain in the low back area (60%) and shoulder pain (60%), followed by pain in the upper back (48.3%) and neck pain (45%) in the last 12 months. Household workers accounting for 73.3% of the subjects commonly complain of pain in the hips/thighs (78.9%), while workers in the service industry commonly complain of knee pain (39.1%).
CONCLUSIONS: Results imply that Filipino migrant workers have a higher prevalence of shoulder and lower back pain in the last 12 months. Household workers are more susceptible to hip/thigh pain. Interventions focusing on ergonomics policy implementation, education on posture and lifting techniques and physical function is recommended. Further studies should consider the psychological and psychosocial aspects of migrant employment, which are known risk factors for MSDs.