We found low- quality evidence that different work-break frequencies may have no effect on participant-reported musculoskeletal pain , discomfort and fatigue .
For productivity and work performance , evidence was of very low- quality that different work-break frequencies may have a positive effect .
For different types of break , there may be no effect on participant-reported musculoskeletal pain , discomfort and fatigue according to low- quality evidence .
Furthermore , work-break interventions should be reconsidered , taking into account worker population s other than office workers , and taking into account the possibility of combining work-break intervention with other interventions such as ergonomic training or counselling , which may may possibly have an effect on musculoskeletal outcomes and work performance
BACKGROUND Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are a group of musculoskeletal disorders that comprise one of the most common disorders related to occupational sick leave worldwide .
Musculoskeletal disorders accounted for 21 % to 28 % of work absenteeism days in 2017/2018 in the Netherl and s , Germany and the UK .
There are several interventions that may be effective in tackling the high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among workers , such as physical , cognitive and organisational interventions .
In this review , we will focus on work breaks as a measure of primary prevention , which are a type of organisational intervention .
OBJECTIVES To compare the effectiveness of different work-break schedules for preventing work-related musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers , when compared to conventional or alternate work-break schedules .
Evaluation of ‘I-Preventive’: a digital preventive tool for musculoskeletal disorders in computer workers—a pilot cluster randomised trial
Objectives I-Preventive is a digital preventive tool for musculoskeletal disorders ( MSDs ) in computer workers . We sought to determine its impact on pain in computer workers with upper limb MSDs and visual discomfort . Methods We conducted a pilot cluster r and omised trial in 2 different sites of a tyre factory in France . We r and omised 200 employees to either an  intervention group ( I-Preventive ) or control group  , each comprising symptomatic and asymptomatic employees . The workers were followed up for 5 months . The main outcome was overall recovery from symptoms following 1 month 's intervention based on Nordic-style and eyestrain question naires . Results We included 185/200 workers : 96 in the intervention group ( mean age 41.8±1.4 years ; 88.5 % males ) and 79 in the control group ( mean age 42.9±12.0 years ; 94.5 % males ) . The most painful areas ( numerical scale ≥2 ) were the neck ( 40.0 % ) , upper back ( 18.8 % ) and shoulders ( 15.7 % ) . For the most painful anatomical area , the Nordic score significantly decreased after 1 month in the intervention group ( p=0.038 ) ; no change was observed in the control group ( p=0.59 ) . After 1 month 's use , the intervention group reported less pain in the painful area and less visual discomfort symptoms ( p=0.02 ) . Adherence to the I-Preventive program was 60 % . Conclusions I-Preventive is effective in the short term on musculoskeletal symptoms and visual discomfort by promoting active breaks and eyestrain treatment . This easy-to-use digital tool allows each worker to focus on areas of their choice via personalised , easy exercises that can be performed in the workplace . Trial registration number NCT02350244 ; Pre- results
We found low- quality evidence that different work-break frequencies may have no effect on participant-reported musculoskeletal pain , discomfort and fatigue .
For productivity and work performance , evidence was of very low- quality that different work-break frequencies may have a positive effect .
For different types of break , there may be no effect on participant-reported musculoskeletal pain , discomfort and fatigue according to low- quality evidence .
Furthermore , work-break interventions should be reconsidered , taking into account worker population s other than office workers , and taking into account the possibility of combining work-break intervention with other interventions such as ergonomic training or counselling , which may may possibly have an effect on musculoskeletal outcomes and work performance
BACKGROUND Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are a group of musculoskeletal disorders that comprise one of the most common disorders related to occupational sick leave worldwide .
Musculoskeletal disorders accounted for 21 % to 28 % of work absenteeism days in 2017/2018 in the Netherl and s , Germany and the UK .
There are several interventions that may be effective in tackling the high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among workers , such as physical , cognitive and organisational interventions .
In this review , we will focus on work breaks as a measure of primary prevention , which are a type of organisational intervention .
OBJECTIVES To compare the effectiveness of different work-break schedules for preventing work-related musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers , when compared to conventional or alternate work-break schedules .