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
<p class="first" id="d9792515e55">Our knowledge of low back disorder (LBD) causation
has progressed well over the years
with in-depth understanding accelerating in the traditional disciplines of biomechanics,
psychology, psychophysics, psychosocial, physiology, genetics, organizational psychology
and rehabilitation. However, each of these disciplines has studied LBD causality in
isolation of other disciplines. The underlying assumption is that each discipline
can fully explain causality and each discipline is treated as if it were mutually
exclusive and exhaustive of the other disciplines. Hence, the body of knowledge has
progressed along research silos where we have in-depth knowledge along given research
tracks that are defined by the boundaries of the discipline. Furthermore, a wealth
of knowledge has been amassed within each of these research silos. How can they all
be correct if they are indeed mutually exclusive and exhaustive? The answer is: they
cannot be. This brief review of the state-of-the art in LBD research applied to ergonomics,
suggests that instead of observing LBD through the myopic lens of each discipline,
we need to begin to view LBD causality as a system. Recent work attempting to understand
the interaction between these traditional disciplines has demonstrated that many of
the findings along these silos are really interrelated and can be explained in terms
of changes in the biomechanical loading at the tissue level. It is argued that further
efforts to understand these interactions represent the next level of understanding
causality of LBDs.
</p>