Ergonomic and physiotherapeutic interventions for treating work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder in adults. A Cochrane systematic review.

Europa medicophysica Pub Date : 2007-09-01
A P Verhagen, C Karels, S M A Bierma-Zeinstra, A Feleus, S Dahaghin, A Burdorf, H C W De Vet, B W Koes
{"title":"Ergonomic and physiotherapeutic interventions for treating work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder in adults. A Cochrane systematic review.","authors":"A P Verhagen, C Karels, S M A Bierma-Zeinstra, A Feleus, S Dahaghin, A Burdorf, H C W De Vet, B W Koes","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Conservative interventions such as physiotherapy and ergonomic adjustments (such as keyboard adjustments or ergonomic advice) play a major role in the treatment of most work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder (CANS). Objectives. This systematic review aims to determine whether conservative interventions have a significant impact on outcomes for work-related CANS in adults. Search strategy. We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (March 2005) and Cochrane Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field Specialised Register (March 2005), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and reference lists of articles. The date of the last search was March 2005. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria. We included randomised controlled trials and concurrent controlled trials studying conservative interventions (e.g. exercises, relaxation, physical applications, biofeedback, myofeedback and work-place adjustments) for adults suffering CANS. Data collection and analysis. Two authors independently selected trials from the search yield, assessed the methodological quality using the Delphi list, and extracted relevant data. We pooled data or, in the event of clinical heterogeneity or lack of data, we used a rating system to assess levels of evidence.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>For this update we included six additional studies; twenty-one trials in total. Seventeen trials included people with chronic nonspecific neck or shoulder complaints, or nonspecific upper extremity disorders. Over twenty-five interventions were evaluated; six main subgroups of interventions could be determined: exercises, manual therapy, massage, ergonomics, energised splint and individual treatment versus group therapy. Overall, the quality of the studies was poor. In 14 studies a form of exercise was evaluated, and contrary to the previous review we now found limited evidence about the effectiveness of exercises when compared to massage and conflicting evidence when exercises are compared to no treatment. In this update there is limited evidence for adding breaks during computer work; massage as add-on treatment on manual therapy, manual therapy as add-on treatment on exercises; and some keyboard designs when compared to other keyboards or placebo in participants with carpal tunnel syndrome.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of keyboards with an alternative force-displacement of the keys or an alternative geometry, and limited evidence for the effectiveness of exercises compared to massage, breaks during computer work compared to no breaks; massage as an add-on treatment to manual therapy, and manual therapy as an add-on treatment to exercises.</p>","PeriodicalId":87180,"journal":{"name":"Europa medicophysica","volume":"43 3","pages":"391-405"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Europa medicophysica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Conservative interventions such as physiotherapy and ergonomic adjustments (such as keyboard adjustments or ergonomic advice) play a major role in the treatment of most work-related complaints of the arm, neck or shoulder (CANS). Objectives. This systematic review aims to determine whether conservative interventions have a significant impact on outcomes for work-related CANS in adults. Search strategy. We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (March 2005) and Cochrane Rehabilitation and Related Therapies Field Specialised Register (March 2005), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2005), PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and reference lists of articles. The date of the last search was March 2005. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria. We included randomised controlled trials and concurrent controlled trials studying conservative interventions (e.g. exercises, relaxation, physical applications, biofeedback, myofeedback and work-place adjustments) for adults suffering CANS. Data collection and analysis. Two authors independently selected trials from the search yield, assessed the methodological quality using the Delphi list, and extracted relevant data. We pooled data or, in the event of clinical heterogeneity or lack of data, we used a rating system to assess levels of evidence.

Main results: For this update we included six additional studies; twenty-one trials in total. Seventeen trials included people with chronic nonspecific neck or shoulder complaints, or nonspecific upper extremity disorders. Over twenty-five interventions were evaluated; six main subgroups of interventions could be determined: exercises, manual therapy, massage, ergonomics, energised splint and individual treatment versus group therapy. Overall, the quality of the studies was poor. In 14 studies a form of exercise was evaluated, and contrary to the previous review we now found limited evidence about the effectiveness of exercises when compared to massage and conflicting evidence when exercises are compared to no treatment. In this update there is limited evidence for adding breaks during computer work; massage as add-on treatment on manual therapy, manual therapy as add-on treatment on exercises; and some keyboard designs when compared to other keyboards or placebo in participants with carpal tunnel syndrome.

Conclusions: There is limited evidence for the effectiveness of keyboards with an alternative force-displacement of the keys or an alternative geometry, and limited evidence for the effectiveness of exercises compared to massage, breaks during computer work compared to no breaks; massage as an add-on treatment to manual therapy, and manual therapy as an add-on treatment to exercises.

人体工程学和物理治疗干预治疗与工作有关的手臂,颈部或肩部的成人投诉。Cochrane系统评价。
背景:保守干预,如物理治疗和人体工程学调整(如键盘调整或人体工程学建议)在治疗大多数与工作有关的手臂,颈部或肩部(can)的投诉中起主要作用。目标。本系统综述旨在确定保守干预是否对成人工作相关can的预后有显著影响。搜索策略。我们检索了Cochrane骨、关节和肌肉创伤组专业注册(2005年3月)、Cochrane康复和相关治疗领域专业注册(2005年3月)、Cochrane对照试验注册(Cochrane图书馆,2005年第1期)、PubMed、EMBASE、CINAHL、AMED和参考文献列表。最后一次搜索的日期是2005年3月。没有语言限制。选择标准。我们纳入了随机对照试验和并发对照试验,研究了对患有can的成年人的保守干预措施(如锻炼、放松、物理应用、生物反馈、肌肉反馈和工作场所调整)。数据收集和分析。两位作者从检索量中独立选择试验,使用德尔菲列表评估方法学质量,并提取相关数据。我们汇总数据,或者在临床异质性或缺乏数据的情况下,我们使用评级系统来评估证据的水平。主要结果:在本次更新中,我们增加了6项研究;总共21次试验。17项试验包括患有慢性非特异性颈部或肩部疾病或非特异性上肢疾病的患者。评估了超过25项干预措施;可以确定干预措施的六个主要子组:锻炼,手工治疗,按摩,人体工程学,能量夹板和个人治疗与团体治疗。总的来说,研究的质量很差。在14项研究中,对一种运动形式进行了评估,与之前的综述相反,我们现在发现,与按摩相比,运动的有效性证据有限,而与不治疗相比,运动的有效性证据则相互矛盾。在这次更新中,在电脑工作期间增加休息时间的证据有限;按摩作为手工疗法的附加疗法,手工疗法作为运动的附加疗法;在腕管综合症的参与者中,将一些键盘设计与其他键盘或安慰剂进行比较。结论:具有替代力的键盘的有效性证据有限-键位移或替代几何形状;与按摩相比,锻炼的有效性证据有限;在电脑工作期间休息与不休息相比;按摩作为手工治疗的附加治疗,手工治疗作为锻炼的附加治疗。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书