Paul Alan Swinton1, Kay Cooper2, Elizabeth Hancock3. 1. School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen AB107QG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: p.swinton@rgu.ac.uk. 2. School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen AB107QG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: k.cooper@rgu.ac.uk. 3. School of Health Sciences, Robert Gordon University, Garthdee Road, Aberdeen AB107QG, United Kingdom. Electronic address: l.hancock@rgu.ac.uk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions to improve sitting posture of workers that spend long periods of time seated at a visual display terminal. METHODS: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and single-group intervention trials featuring workplace interventions with pre- and follow-up measurements of sitting posture was conducted (registered in PROSPERO, CRD#42015027648). Nine databases were searched for studies available between January 2005 and February 2016. RESULTS: 2519 articles were screened with 12 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The included studies featured various ergonomic workplace interventions and comprised 4 randomised controlled trial (n=457), 2 non-randomised controlled trials (n=416) and 6 single-group intervention trials (n=328). Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, pooling of data was not completed and a narrative summary of findings was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The evidence for four review outcomes was assessed with medium to large positive improvements obtained for the majority of studies investigating changes to gross sitting posture, whereas mixed findings were obtained for more specific local segment assessments of sitting posture. The overall evidence quality for all review outcomes were identified as either 'low' or 'very low'. CONCLUSION: There is evidence which is limited in quality to indicate that ergonomic workplace interventions can improve gross sitting posture. More high quality research across a range of intervention types is required with longer follow-up durations and more advanced methods to assess sitting posture with greater frequency and less bias.
PURPOSE: Evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions to improve sitting posture of workers that spend long periods of time seated at a visual display terminal. METHODS: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials and single-group intervention trials featuring workplace interventions with pre- and follow-up measurements of sitting posture was conducted (registered in PROSPERO, CRD#42015027648). Nine databases were searched for studies available between January 2005 and February 2016. RESULTS: 2519 articles were screened with 12 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The included studies featured various ergonomic workplace interventions and comprised 4 randomised controlled trial (n=457), 2 non-randomised controlled trials (n=416) and 6 single-group intervention trials (n=328). Due to clinical and methodological heterogeneity, pooling of data was not completed and a narrative summary of findings was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. The evidence for four review outcomes was assessed with medium to large positive improvements obtained for the majority of studies investigating changes to gross sitting posture, whereas mixed findings were obtained for more specific local segment assessments of sitting posture. The overall evidence quality for all review outcomes were identified as either 'low' or 'very low'. CONCLUSION: There is evidence which is limited in quality to indicate that ergonomic workplace interventions can improve gross sitting posture. More high quality research across a range of intervention types is required with longer follow-up durations and more advanced methods to assess sitting posture with greater frequency and less bias.