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 .
Computer terminal work and the benefit of microbreaks.
Microbreaks are scheduled rest breaks taken to prevent the onset or progression of cumulative trauma disorders in the computerized workstation environment . The authors examined the benefit of microbreaks by investigating myoelectric signal ( MES ) behavior , perceived discomfort , and worker productivity while individuals performed their usual keying work . Participants were r and omly assigned to one of three experimental groups . Each participant provided data from working sessions where they took no breaks , and from working sessions where they took breaks according to their group assignment : microbreaks at their own discretion ( control ) , microbreaks at 20 min intervals , and microbreaks at 40 min intervals . Four main muscle areas were studied : the cervical extensors , the lumbar erector spinae , the upper trapezius/supraspinatus , and the wrist and finger extensors . The authors have previously shown that when computer workers remained seated at their workstation , the muscles performing sustained postural contractions displayed a cyclic trend in the mean frequency ( MNF ) of the MES ( McLean et al. , J. Electrophysiol . Kinesiol . 10 ( 1 ) ( 2000 ) 33 ) . The data provided evidence ( p < 0.05 ) that all microbreak protocol s were associated with a higher frequency of MNF cycling at the wrist extensors , at the neck when microbreaks were taken by the control and 40 min protocol groups , and at the back when breaks were taken by the 20 and 40 min protocol groups . No significant change in the frequency of MNF cycling was noted at the shoulder . It was determined ( p < 0.05 ) that microbreaks had a positive effect on reducing discomfort in all areas studied during computer terminal work , particularly when breaks were taken at 20 min intervals . Finally , microbreaks showed no evidence of a detrimental effect on worker productivity . The underlying cause of MNF cycling , and its relationship to the development of discomfort or cumulative trauma disorders remains to be determined
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 .