Levels of evidence for interventions associated with positive effects were : Moderate evidence for arm supports ; and Limited evidence for ergonomics training plus workstation adjustments , new chair and rest breaks .
Levels of evidence for interventions associated with “ no effect ” were : Strong evidence for workstation adjustment alone ; Moderate evidence for biofeedback training and job stress management training ; and Limited evidence for cognitive behavioral training .
No interventions were associated with “ negative effects ” .
Conclusion It is difficult to make strong evidence d-based recommendations about what practitioners should do to prevent or manage upper extremity MSDs .
There is a paucity of high quality OHS interventions evaluating upper extremity MSDs and none focused on traumatic injury outcomes or workplace m and ated pre-placement screening exams .
Background Little is known about the most effective occupational health and safety ( OHS ) interventions to reduce  upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders ( MSDs ) and injuries .
Methods A systematic review used a best evidence synthesis approach to address the question : “ do occupational health and safety interventions have an effect on upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms , signs , disorders , injuries , cl aims and lost time ? ”
A new bricklayers' method for use in the construction industry.
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of raised bricklaying on physical workload , reported musculoskeletal disorders , sickness absence , and job satisfaction . METHODS A controlled intervention study with a follow-up period of 10 months was performed among 202 bricklayers from 25 construction companies . RESULTS The introduction of devices for raised bricklaying decreased the physical load on the lower back and , to a less extent , on the shoulders and upper extremities . Although raised bricklaying had no effect on the number of lifts , decreases in trunk bending lowered the biomechanical moment . The results showed no decrease in reported musculoskeletal symptoms as a result of the adoption of raised bricklaying . Irrespective of the reason(s ) , the percentage of bricklayers in the intervention group reporting sickness absence was significantly lower than the same percentage in the control group . The results also showed that , in general , the bricklayers in this study were very satisfied with the use of devices for raised bricklaying . CONCLUSIONS Controlled intervention studies on ergonomic improvements are rare . This study shows that the introduction of an ergonomic improvement in the construction industry may reduce physical load and the incidence of sickness absence
Levels of evidence for interventions associated with positive effects were : Moderate evidence for arm supports ; and Limited evidence for ergonomics training plus workstation adjustments , new chair and rest breaks .
Levels of evidence for interventions associated with “ no effect ” were : Strong evidence for workstation adjustment alone ; Moderate evidence for biofeedback training and job stress management training ; and Limited evidence for cognitive behavioral training .
No interventions were associated with “ negative effects ” .
Conclusion It is difficult to make strong evidence d-based recommendations about what practitioners should do to prevent or manage upper extremity MSDs .
There is a paucity of high quality OHS interventions evaluating upper extremity MSDs and none focused on traumatic injury outcomes or workplace m and ated pre-placement screening exams .
Background Little is known about the most effective occupational health and safety ( OHS ) interventions to reduce  upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders ( MSDs ) and injuries .
Methods A systematic review used a best evidence synthesis approach to address the question : “ do occupational health and safety interventions have an effect on upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms , signs , disorders , injuries , cl aims and lost time ? ”