Haiou Yang1, Scott Haldeman2, Ming-Lun Lu3, Dean Baker4. 1. Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of California, Irvine, CA. Electronic address: hyang@uci.edu. 2. Neurology Department, University of California, Irvine, California; Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA. 3. Division of Applied Research and Technology, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH. 4. Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, University of California, Irvine, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to estimate prevalence of low back pain, to investigate associations between low back pain and a set of emerging workplace risk factors, and to identify worker groups with an increased vulnerability for low back pain in the United States. METHODS: The data used for this cross-sectional study came from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey, which was designed to collect data on health conditions and related risk factors from the US civilian population. The variance estimation method was used to compute weighted data for prevalence of low back pain. Multivariable logistic regression analyses stratified by sex and age were performed to determine the odds ratios (ORs) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for low back pain. The examined work-related psychosocial risk factors included work-family imbalance, exposure to a hostile work environment, and job insecurity. Work hours, occupation, and other work organizational factors (nonstandard work arrangements and alternative shifts) were also examined. RESULTS: The prevalence of self-reported low back pain in the previous 3 months among workers in the United States was 25.7% in 2010. Female or older workers were at increased risk of experiencing low back pain. We found significant associations between low back pain and a set of psychosocial factors, including work-family imbalance (OR 1.27, CI 1.15-1.41), exposure to hostile work (OR 1.39, CI 1.25-1.55), and job insecurity (OR 1.44, CI 1.24-1.67), while controlling for demographic characteristics and other health-related factors. Older workers who had nonstandard work arrangements were more likely to report low back pain. Women who worked 41 to 45 hours per week and younger workers who worked >60 hours per week had an increased risk for low back pain. Workers from several occupation groups, including male health care practitioners, female and younger health care support workers, and female farming, fishing, and forestry workers, had an increased risk of low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: This study linked low back pain to work-family imbalance, exposure to a hostile work environment, job insecurity, long work hours, and certain occupation groups. These factors should be considered by employers, policymakers, and health care practitioners who are concerned about the impact of low back pain in workers.
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to estimate prevalence of low back pain, to investigate associations between low back pain and a set of emerging workplace risk factors, and to identify worker groups with an increased vulnerability for low back pain in the United States. METHODS: The data used for this cross-sectional study came from the 2010 National Health Interview Survey, which was designed to collect data on health conditions and related risk factors from the US civilian population. The variance estimation method was used to compute weighted data for prevalence of low back pain. Multivariable logistic regression analyses stratified by sex and age were performed to determine the odds ratios (ORs) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for low back pain. The examined work-related psychosocial risk factors included work-family imbalance, exposure to a hostile work environment, and job insecurity. Work hours, occupation, and other work organizational factors (nonstandard work arrangements and alternative shifts) were also examined. RESULTS: The prevalence of self-reported low back pain in the previous 3 months among workers in the United States was 25.7% in 2010. Female or older workers were at increased risk of experiencing low back pain. We found significant associations between low back pain and a set of psychosocial factors, including work-family imbalance (OR 1.27, CI 1.15-1.41), exposure to hostile work (OR 1.39, CI 1.25-1.55), and job insecurity (OR 1.44, CI 1.24-1.67), while controlling for demographic characteristics and other health-related factors. Older workers who had nonstandard work arrangements were more likely to report low back pain. Women who worked 41 to 45 hours per week and younger workers who worked >60 hours per week had an increased risk for low back pain. Workers from several occupation groups, including male health care practitioners, female and younger health care support workers, and female farming, fishing, and forestry workers, had an increased risk of low back pain. CONCLUSIONS: This study linked low back pain to work-family imbalance, exposure to a hostile work environment, job insecurity, long work hours, and certain occupation groups. These factors should be considered by employers, policymakers, and health care practitioners who are concerned about the impact of low back pain in workers.
Authors: Brook I Martin; Richard A Deyo; Sohail K Mirza; Judith A Turner; Bryan A Comstock; William Hollingworth; Sean D Sullivan Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-02-13 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Margaret D Whitley; Patricia M Herman; Gursel R Aliyev; Cathy D Sherbourne; Gery W Ryan; Ian D Coulter Journal: J Manipulative Physiol Ther Date: 2021-08-29 Impact factor: 1.300
Authors: Mila Pastrak; Nikola Vladicic; Jordan Sam; Bruce Vrooman; Frederick Ma; Ammar Mahmoud; James S Khan; Alaa Abd-Elsayed; Farhan Khandwalla; Scott McGilvray; Ognjen Visnjevac Journal: Curr Pain Headache Rep Date: 2022-09-30
Authors: Madhav R Patel; Kevin C Jacob; Frank A Chavez; Justin T DesLaurier; Hanna Pawlowski; Michael C Prabhu; Nisheka N Vanjani; Kern Singh Journal: Int J Spine Surg Date: 2022-06-20
Authors: Christine Cedraschi; Margareta Nordin; Scott Haldeman; Kristi Randhawa; Deborah Kopansky-Giles; Claire D Johnson; Roger Chou; Eric L Hurwitz; Pierre Côté Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2018-01-27 Impact factor: 3.134