Effectiveness of warm-up interventions on work-related musculoskeletal disorders, physical and psychosocial functions among workers: a systematic review

Abstract

ObjectivesThe aim of this systematic review was to identify from published literature the available evidence regarding the effects of warm-up intervention implemented in the workplace on work -related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and physical and psychosocial functions.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesThe following four electronic databases were searched (from inception onwards to October 2022): Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed (Medline), Web of Science and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro).Eligibility criteriaRandomised and non-randomised controlled studies were included in this review. Interventions should include a warm-up physical intervention in real-workplaces.Data extraction and synthesisThe primary outcomes were pain, discomfort, fatigue and physical functions. This review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence synthesis. To assess the risk of bias, the Cochrane ROB2 was used for randomised controlled trial (RCT) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies-of Interventions was used for the non-RCT studies.ResultsThree studies met the inclusion criterion, one cluster RCT and two non-RCTs. There was an important heterogeneity in the included studies principally concerning population and warm-up intervention exercises. There were important risks of bias in the four selected studies, due to blinding and confounding factors. Overall certainty of evidence was very low.ConclusionDue to the poor methodological quality of studies and conflicting results, there was no evidence supporting the use of warm-up to prevent WMSDs in the workplace. The present findings highlighted the need of good quality studies targeting the effects of warm-up intervention to prevent WMSDs.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019137211.

Investigating the effect of education based on PRECEDE-PROCEED model on the preventive behaviors of musculoskeletal disorders in a group of nurses

“…In the topic of musculoskeletal disorders related to work, some obstacles are related to the work itself and the employer, and others, such as how to sit and stand up correctly, how to move the patient, and how to move the wheelchair, are related to the nurse, which can be led by teaching these things to promote self-efficacy in them. This finding is consistent with the results of van de Wijdeven’s ( 4 ) and Larinier et al’s studies ( 35 ). Training based on the PRECEDE-PROCEED model led to self-efficacy evaluation in nurses, and finally, the intervention improved self-efficacy.…”

Physical activity interventions in workplace health promotion: objectives, related outcomes, and consideration of the setting—a scoping review of reviews

“…Six reviews pursued the objective of identifying solely the effectiveness of PA interventions on promoting PA and/or reducing sedentary behavior (39, 41-43, 45, 54). Two reviews focused on the effects of PA interventions on improving psychological well-being and mental health (37,38,50,52) and two assessed workability (46,53). One review each showed a fitness approach (40,49) or focused musculoskeletal pain (48).…”

“…One review each showed a fitness approach (40,49) or focused musculoskeletal pain (48). Five reviews showed a combined approach regarding the objectives, considering physical activity behavior and health outcomes (38,40,44,47,52). The outcomes of the respective primary studies could be assigned to the following categories: physical activity-related outcomes (38, 39, 41-45, 47, 52, 54), health-related outcomes (37,38,40,44,(47)(48)(49)(50)52), and job-related outcomes (38,41,46,48,52,53).…”

“…The available information from the reviews was classified into three categories: general consideration of the setting, the workplace as an access route to employees, and implementation aspects. Ten reviews noted the general importance of the workplace as a critical setting for health promotion and disease prevention (38,40,(42)(43)(44)(45)(46)(47)52). The relevance was mainly explained by health effects for employees, with two reviews also arguing from a company-related perspective (46,47).…”

“…Regarding implementation, two reviews described the workplace as a relatively controlled setting for implementing a PA intervention (44,49) and three reviews focused on interventions conducted at workplaces and during leisure time (46,53,54). The importance of WHP as an access route to a target group in their daily lives was explicitly mentioned in five reviews (38,42,47,52,54).…”