Adriana Campos-Fumero1,2, George L Delclos1,3,4, David I Douphrate1, Sarah A Felknor1,5, Sergio Vargas-Prada3,4, Consol Serra3,4,6, David Coggon7,8, David Gimeno Ruiz de Porras1,3,4. 1. School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA. 2. Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica, Cartago, Costa Rica. 3. Center for Research in Occupational Health (CiSAL), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain. 4. CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain. 5. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 6. Department of Occupational Health, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain. 7. Arthritis Research-UK/MRC Centre for Musculoskeletal Health and Work, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. 8. Medical Research Council Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the differences in the prevalence and incidence of low back pain (LBP) and associated disability among office workers in Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Spain. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline (n=947, 93% response) in November 2007 and at follow-up after 12 months (n=853, 90% response). Six outcome measures were examined: baseline prevalence of (1) LBP in the past 12 months, (2) LBP in the past month and (3) disabling LBP in the past month; and at follow-up: (4) incidence of new LBP in the past month, (5) new disabling LBP and (6) persistent LBP. Differences in prevalence by country were characterised by ORs with 95% CIs, before and after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Prevalence of LBP in the past month among office employees in Costa Rica (46.0%) and Nicaragua (44.2%) was higher than in Spain (33.6%). Incidence of new LBP was 37.0% in Nicaragua (OR=2.49; 95% CI 1.57 to 3.95), 14.9% in Costa Rica (OR=0.74; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.34) and 19.0% in Spain (reference). Incidence of new disabling LBP was higher in Nicaragua (17.2%; OR=2.49; 95% CI 1.43 to 4.34) and Costa Rica (13.6%; OR=1.89; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.48) than Spain (7.7%), while persistence of LBP was higher only in Nicaragua. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of LBP and disabling LBP was higher in Costa Rican and Nicaraguan office workers than in Spain, but the incidence was higher mainly in Nicaragua. Measured sociodemographic, job-related and health-related variables only partly explained the differences between countries, and further research is needed to explore reasons for the remaining differences. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the differences in the prevalence and incidence of low back pain (LBP) and associated disability among office workers in Costa Rica, Nicaragua and Spain. METHODS: Data were collected at baseline (n=947, 93% response) in November 2007 and at follow-up after 12 months (n=853, 90% response). Six outcome measures were examined: baseline prevalence of (1) LBP in the past 12 months, (2) LBP in the past month and (3) disabling LBP in the past month; and at follow-up: (4) incidence of new LBP in the past month, (5) new disabling LBP and (6) persistent LBP. Differences in prevalence by country were characterised by ORs with 95% CIs, before and after adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Prevalence of LBP in the past month among office employees in Costa Rica (46.0%) and Nicaragua (44.2%) was higher than in Spain (33.6%). Incidence of new LBP was 37.0% in Nicaragua (OR=2.49; 95% CI 1.57 to 3.95), 14.9% in Costa Rica (OR=0.74; 95% CI 0.41 to 1.34) and 19.0% in Spain (reference). Incidence of new disabling LBP was higher in Nicaragua (17.2%; OR=2.49; 95% CI 1.43 to 4.34) and Costa Rica (13.6%; OR=1.89; 95% CI 1.03 to 3.48) than Spain (7.7%), while persistence of LBP was higher only in Nicaragua. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of LBP and disabling LBP was higher in Costa Rican and Nicaraguan office workers than in Spain, but the incidence was higher mainly in Nicaragua. Measured sociodemographic, job-related and health-related variables only partly explained the differences between countries, and further research is needed to explore reasons for the remaining differences. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Authors: Tracy Jackson; Sarah Thomas; Victoria Stabile; Xue Han; Matthew Shotwell; Kelly McQueen Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-04-26 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: David Gimeno Ruiz de Porras; Marianela Rojas Garbanzo; Aurora Aragón; Lino Carmenate-Milián; Fernando G Benavides Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Mosharop Hossian; Mohammad Hayatun Nabi; Ahmed Hossain; Mohammad Delwer Hossain Hawlader; Nadira Sultana Kakoly Journal: J Prev Med Public Health Date: 2022-01-12