BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are a widespread affliction in the nursing profession. Back or neck-pain-related disability of nursing staff is mainly attributed to physical and psychosocial risk factors. OBJECTIVES: To investigate which-and to what extent-physical and psychosocial risk factors are associated with neck/back-pain-related disability in nursing, and to assess the role of the type of health care institution (hospitals, nursing homes and home care institutions) within different countries in this problem. DESIGN: Cross-sectional secondary analysis of multinational data of nurses and auxiliary staff in hospitals (n=16,770), nursing homes (n=2140) and home care institutions (n=2606) in seven countries from the European NEXT-Study. METHODS: Multinomial logistic regression analysis with raw models for each factor and mutually adjusted with all analysed variables. RESULTS: Analysis of the pooled data revealed effort-reward imbalance as the predominant risk factor for disability in all settings (odds ratios for high disability by effort-reward ratio: hospital 5.05 [4.30-5.93]; nursing home 6.52 [4.04-10.52] and home care 6.4 [3.83-10.70] [after mutual adjustment of psychosocial and physical risk factors]). In contrast, physical exposure to lifting and bending showed only limited associations with odds ratios below 1.6; the availability and use of lifting aids was-after mutual adjustment-not or only marginally associated with disability. These findings were basically confirmed in separate analyses for all seven countries and types of institutions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show a pronounced association between psychosocial factors and back or neck-pain-related disability. Further research should consider psychosocial factors and should take the setting where nurses work into account.
BACKGROUND:Musculoskeletal disorders are a widespread affliction in the nursing profession. Back or neck-pain-related disability of nursing staff is mainly attributed to physical and psychosocial risk factors. OBJECTIVES: To investigate which-and to what extent-physical and psychosocial risk factors are associated with neck/back-pain-related disability in nursing, and to assess the role of the type of health care institution (hospitals, nursing homes and home care institutions) within different countries in this problem. DESIGN: Cross-sectional secondary analysis of multinational data of nurses and auxiliary staff in hospitals (n=16,770), nursing homes (n=2140) and home care institutions (n=2606) in seven countries from the European NEXT-Study. METHODS: Multinomial logistic regression analysis with raw models for each factor and mutually adjusted with all analysed variables. RESULTS: Analysis of the pooled data revealed effort-reward imbalance as the predominant risk factor for disability in all settings (odds ratios for high disability by effort-reward ratio: hospital 5.05 [4.30-5.93]; nursing home 6.52 [4.04-10.52] and home care 6.4 [3.83-10.70] [after mutual adjustment of psychosocial and physical risk factors]). In contrast, physical exposure to lifting and bending showed only limited associations with odds ratios below 1.6; the availability and use of lifting aids was-after mutual adjustment-not or only marginally associated with disability. These findings were basically confirmed in separate analyses for all seven countries and types of institutions. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show a pronounced association between psychosocial factors and back or neck-pain-related disability. Further research should consider psychosocial factors and should take the setting where nurses work into account.
Authors: Madeleine Dulon; Kathrin Kromark; Christoph Skudlik; Albert Nienhaus Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2007-12-19 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Behdin Nowrouzi; Nancy Lightfoot; Lorraine Carter; Michel Larivère; Ellen Rukholm; Diane Belanger-Gardner Journal: Saf Health Work Date: 2015-07-29
Authors: Maria Girbig; Stefanie Deckert; Christian Kopkow; Ute Latza; Madeleine Dulon; Albert Nienhaus; David Groneberg; Andreas Seidler Journal: J Occup Med Toxicol Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 2.646