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 Cross-Country Comparison of Short-and Long-Term Effects of an Ergonomic Intervention on Musculoskeletal Discomfort, Eyestrain and Psychosocial Stress in VDT Operators: Selected Aspects of the International Project
Three groups of data entry female visual display terminal ( VDT ) workers from Norway ( n = 30 ) , Pol and ( n = 33 ) and the USA ( n = 29 ) were compared . Before intervention , the Norwegian group reported more neck pain compared with the Polish group . The Polish group reported less shoulder pain than both the U.S. and the Norwegian groups . The clinical examination documented fewer symptoms and signs of musculoskeletal illness among the Polish participants compared with the Norwegian and the U.S. groups . After intervention , the Norwegian group reported a reduction in neck pain while the U.S. group reported a reduction in shoulder pain . The Polish group reported an increase in neck , shoulder and forearm pain at follow-up compared to after intervention . The Polish group recorded higher flexion of the upper arm at follow-up parallel with an increase of pain in the upper part of the body . Visual discomfort showed variable results in the 3 countries
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 ? ”