10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

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

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references32

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Determinants of participation in worksite health promotion programmes: a systematic review

          Background The workplace has been identified as a promising setting for health promotion, and many worksite health promotion programmes have been implemented in the past years. Research has mainly focused on the effectiveness of these interventions. For implementation of interventions at a large scale however, information about (determinants of) participation in these programmes is essential. This systematic review investigates initial participation in worksite health promotion programmes, the underlying determinants of participation, and programme characteristics influencing participation levels. Methods Studies on characteristics of participants and non-participants in worksite health promotion programmes aimed at physical activity and/or nutrition published from 1988 to 2007 were identified through a structured search in PubMed and Web of Science. Studies were included if a primary preventive worksite health promotion programme on PA and/or nutrition was described, and if quantitative information was present on determinants of participation. Results In total, 23 studies were included with 10 studies on educational or counselling programmes, 6 fitness centre interventions, and 7 studies examining determinants of participation in multi-component programmes. Participation levels varied from 10% to 64%, with a median of 33% (95% CI 25–42%). In general, female workers had a higher participation than men (OR = 1.67; 95% CI 1.25–2.27]), but this difference was not observed for interventions consisting of access to fitness centre programmes. For the other demographic, health- and work-related characteristics no consistent effect on participation was found. Pooling of studies showed a higher participation level when an incentive was offered, when the programme consisted of multiple components, or when the programme was aimed at multiple behaviours. Conclusion In this systematic review, participation levels in health promotion interventions at the workplace were typically below 50%. Few studies evaluated the influence of health, lifestyle and work-related factors on participation, which hampers the insight in the underlying determinants of initial participation in worksite health promotion. Nevertheless, the present review does provide some strategies that can be adopted in order to increase participation levels. In addition, the review highlights that further insight is essential to develop intervention programmes with the ability to reach many employees, including those who need it most and to increase the generalizability across all workers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Questionnaire versus direct technical measurements in assessing postures and movements of the head, upper back, arms and hands.

            This study compares questionnaire-assessed exposure data on work postures and movements with direct technical measurements. Inclinometers and goniometers were used to make full workday measurements of 41 office workers and 41 cleaners, stratified for such factors as musculoskeletal complaints. The subjects answered a questionnaire on work postures of the head, back, and upper arms and repeated movements of the arms and hands (3-point scales). The questionnaire had been developed on the basis of a previously validated one. For assessing worktasks and their durations, the subjects kept a 2-week worktask diary. Job exposure was individually calculated by time-weighting the task exposure measurements according to the diary. The agreement between the self-assessed and measured postures and movements was low (kappa = 0.06 for the mean within the occupational groups and kappa = 0.27 for the whole group). Cleaners had a higher measured workload than office workers giving the same questionnaire response. Moreover, the subjects with neck-shoulder complaints rated their exposure to movements as higher than those without complaints but with the same measured mechanical exposure. In addition, these subjects also showed a general tendency to rate their postural exposure as higher. The women rated their exposure higher than the men did. The questionnaire-assessed exposure data had low validity. For the various response categories the measured exposure depended on occupation. Furthermore, there was a differential misclassification due to musculoskeletal complaints and gender. Thus it seems difficult to construct valid questionnaires on mechanical exposure for establishing generic exposure-response relations in epidemiologic studies, especially cross-sectional ones. Direct technical measurements may be preferable.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Biomechanical risk factors for carpal tunnel syndrome: a pooled study of 2474 workers

              Background Between 2001 and 2010, five research groups conducted coordinated prospective studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence among US workers from various industries and collected detailed subject-level exposure information with follow-up of symptoms, electrophysiological measures and job changes. Objective This analysis examined the associations between workplace biomechanical factors and incidence of dominant-hand CTS, adjusting for personal risk factors. Methods 2474 participants, without CTS or possible polyneuropathy at enrolment, were followed up to 6.5 years (5102 person-years). Individual workplace exposure measures of the dominant hand were collected for each task and included force, repetition, duty cycle and posture. Task exposures were combined across the workweek using time-weighted averaging to estimate job-level exposures. CTS case-criteria were based on symptoms and results of electrophysiological testing. HRs were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. Results After adjustment for covariates, analyst (HR=2.17; 95% CI 1.38 to 3.43) and worker (HR=2.08; 95% CI 1.31 to 3.39) estimated peak hand force, forceful repetition rate (HR=1.84; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.86) and per cent time spent (eg, duty cycle) in forceful hand exertions (HR=2.05; 95% CI 1.34 to 3.15) were associated with increased risk of incident CTS. Associations were not observed between total hand repetition rate, per cent duration of all hand exertions, or wrist posture and incident CTS. Conclusions In this prospective multicentre study of production and service workers, measures of exposure to forceful hand exertion were associated with incident CTS after controlling for important covariates. These findings may influence the design of workplace safety programmes for preventing work-related CTS.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Occup Environ Med
                Occup Environ Med
                oemed
                oem
                Occupational and Environmental Medicine
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                1351-0711
                1470-7926
                July 2018
                29 March 2018
                : 75
                : 7
                : 501-506
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentDivision of General Medical Sciences , Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis , St Louis, Missouri, USA
                [2 ] departmentGeorge Warren Brown School , Washington University in Saint Louis , St Louis, Missouri, USA
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Occupational and Environmental Health , University of Iowa , Iowa City, Iowa, USA
                [4 ] departmentRocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health (RMCOEH) , University of Utah , Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
                [5 ] departmentSafety and Health Assessment and Research for Prevention (SHARP) Program , Washington State Department of Labor and Industries , Olympia, Washington, USA
                [6 ] departmentDivision of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies , National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health , Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
                [7 ] departmentDepartment of Environmental Health Sciences , University of California Berkeley , Berkeley, California, USA
                [8 ] departmentDepartment of Occupational Science and Technology , University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee , Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
                [9 ] departmentDivision of Occupational and Environmental Medicine , University of California at San Francisco , San Francisco, California, USA
                [10 ] departmentDepartment of Bioengineering , University of California Berkeley , Berkeley, California, USA
                [11 ] departmentMercy Healthcare , Virtual Care Center , Chesterfield, Missouri, USA
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Ann Marie Dale, Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, St Louis, MO 63110, USA; amdale@ 123456wustl.edu
                Article
                oemed-2017-104744
                10.1136/oemed-2017-104744
                6035491
                29599164
                6dafdd73-2f93-4651-8cec-7e2205c6efa9
                © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 29 August 2017
                : 07 February 2018
                : 12 March 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: Siteman Cancer Center;
                Funded by: Center for Disease Control / National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100007338, Foundation for Barnes-Jewish Hospital;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000054, National Cancer Institute;
                Categories
                Exposure Assessment
                1506
                Original article
                Custom metadata
                unlocked

                Occupational & Environmental medicine
                carpal tunnel syndrome,job exposure matrix,occupational epidemiology,exposure-response models,validity

                Comments

                Comment on this article