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 ? ”
The Effectiveness of Standard Care, Early Intervention, and Occupational Management in Worker’s Compensation Claims
Study Design . A retrospective and prospect i ve cohort . Objectives . To compare the effectiveness of occupational intervention , early intervention , and st and ard care in the management of Worker ’s Compensation injury cl aims . Summary of Background Data . The current management of occupational back pain and work-related upper extremity disorders with either st and ard care or early intervention appears to be ineffective . Methods . A retrospective cohort compared injury cl aim incidence , duration ,  and costs  between one company with access to st and ard care and another similar company with access to early intervention .  A prospect i ve cohort looked at the effect of one company changing from  st and ard care to occupational management  in comparison with the control group with early intervention .  Survival analysis was used to attempt to explain differences in injury cl aim duration . Results . St and ard care result ed in lower injury cl aim incidence , duration , and costs than early intervention , whereas occupational management result ed in lower injury cl aim incidence , duration , and costs than st and ard care . The covariates of physical therapist involvement , chiropractor involvement , injury severity , and relationship between Worker ’s Compensation and the employer were associated with delayed time to cl aim closure in the company with access to early intervention with the most important covariate being physical therapist involvement ( hazard rate ratio 19.88 , 95 % confidence interval 7.95–39.77 ) . Only the covariate of injury severity was associated with delayed time to cl aim closure in the company with access to occupational management ( hazard rate ratio 1.67 , 95 % confidence interval 1.05–27.20 ) . Conclusions . It is recommended that an occupational management approach , in comparison with st and ard care or early intervention , be considered for management of occupational injuries
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 ? ”