首页 正文

Randomized Controlled Trial BMJ open. 2021 Jun 25;11(6):e040101. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040101 Q22.32024

Effectiveness of workplace active rest programme on low back pain in office workers: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

针对办公室工作人员的职场主动休息计划对防治腰痛的效果研究:分阶段楔入群组随机对照试验 翻译改进

Yamato Tsuboi  1  2, Tomohiro Oka  1  3, Kiyomasa Nakatsuka  4, Tsunenori Isa  1, Rei Ono  5

作者单位 +展开

作者单位

  • 1 Department of Community Health Sciences, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Kobe, Japan.
  • 2 BackTech, Kyoto, Japan.
  • 3 Department of Rehabilitation, Anshin Hospital, Kobe, Japan.
  • 4 Department of Public Health, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Kobe, Japan.
  • 5 Department of Public Health, Kobe University Graduate School of Health Sciences, Kobe, Japan ono@phoenix.kobe-u.ac.jp.
  • DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040101 PMID: 34172540

    摘要 Ai翻译

    Objective: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of workplace active rest programme (WARP) on chronic low back pain (LBP) among office workers.

    Design: A closed cohort, stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial was conducted. The total duration of the study was 16 weeks (4 weeks for each step). Sequence allocation was randomised, but no one was blinded.

    Setting: This study was conducted in three offices in a Japanese electronics company. One office was for the administrative department, the others are for the engineering department.

    Participants: We recruited 29 office workers with LBP greater than 3 months. LBP due to specific injury or disease was excluded. The median age was 38 years, and 26 (90%) were male. All participants completed the study.

    Interventions: In the intervention phase, participants performed WARP comprising frequent stand-up and individualised brief exercise/physical activity during work. Physical therapists held an LBP workshop and developed tailor-made programmes before introducing WARP. We instructed participants to perform WARP at five timings during work. Control phase was set before the intervention and participants stayed as usual.

    Primary and secondary outcome measures: The primary outcome was pain intensity of LBP assessed using the Brief Pain Inventory. The secondary outcomes were work productivity loss measured using the Work Limitations Questionnaire, LBP disability assessed using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, psychosocial subscale assessed using the STarT Back Screening Tool and physical activity measured using triaxial accelerometers. These outcomes were collected at baseline and at 4-month follow-up evaluation.

    Results: In the intention-to-treat analysis, WARP did not show any significant effects on pain intensity (β, 0.01; 95% CI -0.50 to 0.52) and on the secondary outcomes. The median adherence to WARP was 28.6% (IQR, 16.8-41.1), which was equal to 1.43 times per day. No adverse effect was observed.

    Conclusions: The present study was unable to confirm the effectiveness of active rest in improving LBP. Hence, further study needs to investigate its effectiveness.

    Trial registration number: UMIN000033210.

    Keywords: back pain; occupational & industrial medicine; pain management.

    Keywords:low back pain; office workers

    Copyright © BMJ open. 中文内容为AI机器翻译,仅供参考!

    相关内容

    期刊名:Bmj open

    缩写:BMJ OPEN

    ISSN:2044-6055

    e-ISSN:2044-6055

    IF/分区:2.3/Q2

    文章目录 更多期刊信息

    全文链接
    引文链接
    复制
    已复制!
    推荐内容
    Effectiveness of workplace active rest programme on low back pain in office workers: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial