Cost-effectiveness of postural exercise therapy versus physiotherapy in computer screen-workers with early non-specific work-related upper limb disorders (WRULD); a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Exercise therapies generate substantial costs in computer workers with non-specific work-related upper limb disorders (WRULD).</p> <p>Aims</p> <p>To study if postural exercise therapy is cost-effective compared to regular physiotherapy in screen-workers with early complaints, both from health care and societal perspective.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Prospective randomized trial including cost-effectiveness analysis; one year follow-up. Participants: Eighty-eight screen-workers with early non-specific WRULD; six drop-outs. Interventions: A ten week postural exercise program versus regular physiotherapy. Outcome measures: Effectiveness measures: Pain: visual analogous scale (VAS), self-perceived WRULD (yes/no). Functional outcome: Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand- Dutch Language Version (DASH-DLV). Quality of life outcome: EQ-5D.</p> <p>Economic measures: health care costs including patient and family costs and productivity costs resulting in societal costs. Cost-effectiveness measures: health care costs and societal costs related to the effectiveness measures. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline; three, six and twelve months after baseline.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At baseline both groups were comparable for baseline characteristics except scores on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and comparable for costs. No significant differences between the groups concerning effectiveness at one year follow-up were found. Effectiveness scores slightly improved over time. After one year 55% of participants were free of complaints. After one year the postural exercise group had higher mean total health care costs, but lower productivity costs compared to the physiotherapy group. Mean societal costs after one year (therefore) were in favor of postural exercise therapy [- €622; 95% CI -2087; +590)]. After one year, only self- perceived WRULD seemed to result in acceptable cost-effectiveness of the postural exercise strategy over physiotherapy; however the probability of acceptable cost-effectiveness did not exceed 60%.</p> <p>Considering societal costs related to QALYs, postural exercise therapy had a probability of over 80% to be cost-effective over a wide range of cost-effectiveness ceiling ratios; however based on a marginal QALY-difference of 0.1 over a 12 month time frame.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although our trial failed to find significant differences in VAS, QALYs and ICERs based on VAS and QALYs at one-year follow-up, CEACs suggest that postural exercise therapy according to Mensendieck/Cesar has a higher probability of being cost-effective compared to regular physiotherapy; however further research is required.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ISRCTN 15872455</p

Effectiveness of a questionnaire based intervention programme on the prevalence of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms, risk factors and sick leave in computer workers: A cluster randomised controlled trial in an occupational setting

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Arm, shoulder and neck symptoms are very prevalent among computer workers. In an attempt to reduce these symptoms, a large occupational health service in the Netherlands developed a preventive programme on exposure to risk factors, prevalence of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms, and sick leave in computer workers. The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of this intervention programme.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study was a randomised controlled trial. The participants were assigned to either the intervention group or the usual care group by means of cluster randomisation. At baseline and after 12 months of follow-up, the participants completed the RSI QuickScan questionnaire on exposure to the risk factors and on the prevalence of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms. A tailor-made intervention programme was proposed to participants with a high risk profile at baseline. Examples of implemented interventions are an individual workstation check, a visit to the occupational health physician and an education programme on the prevention of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms. The primary outcome measure was the prevalence of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms. Secondary outcome measures were the scores on risk factors for arm, shoulder and neck symptoms and the number of days of sick leave. Sick leave data was obtained from the companies. Multilevel analyses were used to test the effectiveness.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of the 1,673 persons invited to participate in the study, 1,183 persons (71%) completed the baseline questionnaire and 741 persons participated at baseline as well as at 12-month follow-up. At 12-month follow-up, the intervention group showed a significant positive change (OR = 0.48) in receiving information on healthy computer use, as well as a significant positive change regarding risk indicators for work posture and movement, compared to the usual care group. There were no significant differences in changes in the prevalence of arm, shoulder and neck symptoms or sick leave between the intervention and usual care group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The effects of the RSI QuickScan intervention programme were small, possibly as a result of difficulties with the implementation process of the proposed interventions. However, some significant positive effects were found as to an increase in receiving education and a decrease in exposure to adverse postures and movements. With regard to symptoms and sick leave, only small and non-significant effects were found.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Netherlands National Trial Register NTR1117</p

A trial of a job-specific workers' health surveillance program for construction workers: study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Dutch construction workers are offered periodic health examinations. This care can be improved by tailoring this workers health surveillance (WHS) to the demands of the job and adjust the preventive actions to the specific health risks of a worker in a particular job. To improve the quality of the WHS for construction workers and stimulate relevant job-specific preventive actions by the occupational physician, we have developed a job-specific WHS. The job-specific WHS consists of modules assessing both physical and psychological requirements. The selected measurement instruments chosen, are based on their appropriateness to measure the workers' capacity and health requirements. They include a questionnaire and biometrical tests, and physical performance tests that measure physical functional capabilities. Furthermore, our job-specific WHS provides occupational physicians with a protocol to increase the worker-behavioural effectiveness of their counselling and to stimulate job-specific preventive actions. The objective of this paper is to describe and clarify our study to evaluate the behavioural effects of this job-specific WHS on workers and occupational physicians.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The ongoing study of bricklayers and supervisors is a nonrandomised trial to compare the outcome of an intervention (job-specific WHS) group (n = 206) with that of a control (WHS) group (n = 206). The study includes a three-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of participants who have undertaken one or more of the preventive actions advised by their occupational physician in the three months after attending the WHS. A process evaluation will be carried out to determine context, reach, dose delivered, dose received, fidelity, and satisfaction. The present study is in accordance with the TREND Statement.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study will allow an evaluation of the behaviour of both the workers and occupational physician regarding the preventive actions undertaken by them within the scope of a job-specific WHS.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=3012">NTR3012</a></p

Cluster Analysis of Symptoms Among Patients with Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Disorders

Introduction Some musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity are not readily classified. The study objective was to determine if there were symptom patterns in self-identified repetitive strain injury (RSI) patients. Methods Members (n = 700) of the Dutch RSI Patients Association filled out a detailed symptom questionnaire. Factor analysis followed by cluster analysis grouped correlated symptoms. Results Eight clusters, based largely on symptom severity and quality were formulated. All but one cluster showed diffuse symptoms; the exception was characterized by bilateral symptoms of stiffness and aching pain in the shoulder/neck. Conclusions Case definitions which localize upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders to a specific anatomical area may be incomplete. Future clustering studies should rely on both signs and symptoms. Data could be collected from health care providers prospectively to determine the possible prognostic value of the identified clusters with respect to natural history, chronicity, and return to work

Musculoskeletal symptoms of the upper extremities and the neck: A cross-sectional study on prevalence and symptom-predicting factors at visual display terminal (VDT) workstations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and the predictors of musculoskeletal symptoms in the upper extremities and neck at visual display terminal (VDT) workstations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a cross-sectional study 1,065 employees working at VDT > 1 h/d completed a standardised questionnaire. Workstation conditions were documented in a standardised checklist, and a subgroup of 82 employees underwent a physical examination.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Using the Nordic Questionnaire, the 12-month prevalence of symptoms of the neck, shoulder region, hand/wrist, or elbow/lower arm was 55%, 38%, 21%, and 15% respectively. The duration of VDT work had a significant impact on the frequency of neck symptoms in employees performing such work > 6 h/d.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>With regard to musculoskeletal symptoms of the upper extremities, preventive measures at VDT workstations should be focused on neck and shoulder symptoms (e.g. ergonomic measures, breaks to avoid sitting over long periods).</p

Cost-effectiveness of a vocational enablement protocol for employees with hearing impairment; design of a randomized controlled trial

Background: Hearing impairment at the workplace, and the resulting psychosocial problems are a major health problem with substantial costs for employees, companies, and society. Therefore, it is important to develop interventions to support hearing impaired employees. The objective of this article is to describe the design of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the (cost-) effectiveness of a Vocational Enablement Protocol (VEP) compared with usual care. Methods/Design. Participants will be selected with the 'Hearing and Distress Screener'. The study population will consist of 160 hearing impaired employees. The VEP intervention group will be compared with usual care. The VEP integrated care programme consists of a multidisciplinary assessment of auditory function, work demands, and personal characteristics. The goal of the intervention is to facilitate participation in work. The primary outcome measure of the study is 'need for recovery after work'. Secondary outcome measures are coping with hearing impairment, distress, self-efficacy, psychosocial workload, job control, general health status, sick leave, work productivity, and health care use. Outcome measures will be assessed by questionnaires at baseline, and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after baseline. The economic evaluation will be performed from both a societal and a company perspective. A process evaluation will also be performed. Discussion. Interventions addressing occupational difficulties of hearing impaired employees are rare but highly needed. If the VEP integrated care programme proves to be (cost-) effective, the intervention can have an impact on the well-being of hearing impaired employees, and thereby, on the costs for the company as well for the society. Trial registration. Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR2782. © 2012 Gussenhoven et al; BioMed Central Ltd