OBJECTIVE: The three main objectives are to analyze published pen-and-paper observational methods, to extract and understand the risk levels of each method and to identify their associated health effects.
METHODOLOGY: The authors searched scientific databases and the Internet for materials from 1970 to 2013 using the following keywords: ergo, posture, method, observational, postural angle, health effects, pain and diseases. Postural assessments of upper arms, lower arms, wrists, neck, back and legs in six pen-and-paper-based observational methods are highlighted, extracted in groups and linked with associated adverse health effects.
RESULTS: The literature reviewed showed strengths and limitations of published pen-and-paper-based observational methods in determining the work activities, risk levels and related postural angles to adverse health effects. This provided a better understanding of unsafe work postures and how to improve these postures.
CONCLUSION: Many pen-and-paper-based observational methods have been developed. However, there are still many limitations of these methods. There is, therefore, a need to develop a new pen-and-paper-based observational method for assessing postural problems.
METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, we included 1,365 employees enrolled in the university's workplace health promotion program, a program conducted since 2008 and using data from the 2008-2013 follow-up period. Participants were permanent employees aged 35 years and above, with at least one follow up measurements and no change in antihypertensive medication during the study period. Baseline socio-demographic information was collected using a questionnaire while anthropometry measurements and resting blood pressure were collected during annual health screening. Changes in blood pressure over time were analyzed using a linear mixed model.
RESULTS: The systolic blood pressure in the hypertension subgroup decreased 2.36 mmHg per year (p<0.0001). There was also significant improvement in systolic blood pressure among the participants who were at risk of hypertension (-0.75 mmHg, p<0.001). The diastolic blood pressure among the hypertensive and at risk subgroups improved 1.76 mmHg/year (p<0.001) and 0.56 mmHg/year (p<0.001), respectively. However, there was no change in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure among participants in the healthy subgroup over the 6-year period.
CONCLUSION: This study shows that continuing participation in workplace health promotion program has the potential to improve blood pressure levels among employees.
METHODS: Retrospective data pertaining to 713 patients from January 2009 to December 2013 were retrieved from hospital and disease notification records for analysis. The risk factors for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection were grouped into IVDU and non-IVDU risk factors for analysis using multiple logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of the hepatitis C patients included in this study, the most common age group was 31 to 40 years (30.2%), and male patients (91.2%) made up the overwhelming majority. Ethnic Malays constituted approximately 80.4% of the patients, and IVDU was the main risk factor (77.8%) for HCV infection. Multiple logistic regression showed that male patients were 59 times more likely to have IVDU as a risk factor for HCV infection. Single patients were 2.5 times more likely to have IVDU as a risk factor. Patients aged ≥71 years were much less likely than patients aged ≤30 years to have IVDU as a risk factor for HCV infection.
CONCLUSIONS: IVDU was found to be an important risk factor for HCV infection among patients in the KS district. The factors associated with IVDU included age, sex, and marital status. Appropriate preventive measures should be developed to target the groups in which IVDU is most likely to be a risk factor for HCV infection.