Mental health and vitality predict spinal pain in healthcare workers.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
A Espin, R Núñez-Cortés, J Irazusta, A Rodriguez-Larrad, J Torres-Unda, J Vinstrup, M D Jakobsen, L L Andersen
{"title":"Mental health and vitality predict spinal pain in healthcare workers.","authors":"A Espin, R Núñez-Cortés, J Irazusta, A Rodriguez-Larrad, J Torres-Unda, J Vinstrup, M D Jakobsen, L L Andersen","doi":"10.1093/occmed/kqad096","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite extensive investigation of ergonomic risk factors for spinal pain in healthcare workers, limited knowledge of psychological risk factors exists.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To assess the prospective association of mental health and vitality with development of spinal pain in healthcare workers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A prospective cohort study was carried out involving 1950 healthcare workers from 19 hospitals in Denmark. Assessments were done at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Mental health and vitality were measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey, while spinal pain intensity was measured using a 0-10 scale in the low-back, upper-back and neck, respectively. Cumulative logistic regressions adjusted for several confounding factors were applied, reporting risk estimates as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Using good mental health as reference, moderate (but not poor) mental health at baseline was associated with increased pain intensity in the low-back (OR: 1.41 [95% CI: 1.21-1.77]), upper-back (OR: 1.63 [95% CI: 1.31-2.02]) and neck (OR: 1.31 [95% CI: 1.07-1.61]) at 1-year follow-up. Likewise, using high vitality as reference, both moderate and low vitality at baseline were associated with increased pain intensity in the low-back (OR: 1.54 [95% CI: 1.22-1.94] and OR: 2.34 [95% CI: 1.75-3.12], respectively), upper-back (OR: 1.72 [95% CI: 1.34-2.23] and OR: 2.46 [95% CI: 1.86-3.25], respectively) and neck (OR: 1.66 [95% CI: 1.34-2.06] and OR: 2.06 [95% CI: 1.61-2.63], respectively) at 1-year follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to healthcare workers with good mental health and high vitality, those with moderate mental health and low/moderate vitality, respectively, were more likely to increase spinal pain intensity at 1-year follow-up. These components should also be considered in the prevention of spinal pain in healthcare workers.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqad096","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite extensive investigation of ergonomic risk factors for spinal pain in healthcare workers, limited knowledge of psychological risk factors exists.

Aims: To assess the prospective association of mental health and vitality with development of spinal pain in healthcare workers.

Methods: A prospective cohort study was carried out involving 1950 healthcare workers from 19 hospitals in Denmark. Assessments were done at baseline and at 1-year follow-up. Mental health and vitality were measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey, while spinal pain intensity was measured using a 0-10 scale in the low-back, upper-back and neck, respectively. Cumulative logistic regressions adjusted for several confounding factors were applied, reporting risk estimates as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Results: Using good mental health as reference, moderate (but not poor) mental health at baseline was associated with increased pain intensity in the low-back (OR: 1.41 [95% CI: 1.21-1.77]), upper-back (OR: 1.63 [95% CI: 1.31-2.02]) and neck (OR: 1.31 [95% CI: 1.07-1.61]) at 1-year follow-up. Likewise, using high vitality as reference, both moderate and low vitality at baseline were associated with increased pain intensity in the low-back (OR: 1.54 [95% CI: 1.22-1.94] and OR: 2.34 [95% CI: 1.75-3.12], respectively), upper-back (OR: 1.72 [95% CI: 1.34-2.23] and OR: 2.46 [95% CI: 1.86-3.25], respectively) and neck (OR: 1.66 [95% CI: 1.34-2.06] and OR: 2.06 [95% CI: 1.61-2.63], respectively) at 1-year follow-up.

Conclusions: Compared to healthcare workers with good mental health and high vitality, those with moderate mental health and low/moderate vitality, respectively, were more likely to increase spinal pain intensity at 1-year follow-up. These components should also be considered in the prevention of spinal pain in healthcare workers.

心理健康和活力可预测医护人员的脊柱疼痛。
背景:目的:评估心理健康和活力与医护人员脊柱疼痛发生的前瞻性关联:方法:对丹麦 19 家医院的 1950 名医护人员进行了前瞻性队列研究。在基线和随访 1 年时进行了评估。心理健康和活力采用短表-36健康调查进行测量,脊柱疼痛强度采用0-10分制,分别测量腰部、上背部和颈部的疼痛程度。采用累积逻辑回归法对几种混杂因素进行调整,以几率比(OR)和95%置信区间(CI)的形式报告风险估计值:以良好的心理健康状况为参照,基线心理健康状况中等(而非较差)与随访一年时腰背部(OR:1.41 [95% CI:1.21-1.77])、上背部(OR:1.63 [95% CI:1.31-2.02])和颈部(OR:1.31 [95% CI:1.07-1.61])疼痛强度增加有关。同样,以高活力为参照,基线活力为中度和低度时,腰背部疼痛强度增加(OR:1.54 [95% CI:1.22-1.94] 和 OR:2.34 [95% CI:1.75-3.12]),上背部疼痛强度增加(OR:1.63 [95% CI:1.31-2.02]),颈部疼痛强度增加(OR:1.31 [95% CI:1.07-1.61])。12])、上背部(OR:1.72 [95% CI:1.34-2.23]和 OR:2.46 [95% CI:1.86-3.25])和颈部(OR:1.66 [95% CI:1.34-2.06]和 OR:2.06 [95% CI:1.61-2.63])的疼痛强度:结论:与精神健康状况良好和活力较高的医护人员相比,精神健康状况中等和活力较低/中等的医护人员在 1 年随访时脊柱疼痛强度更有可能增加。在预防医护人员脊柱疼痛时也应考虑这些因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信