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 Effect of an Ergonomic Intervention on Musculoskeletal, Psychosocial and Visual Strain of VDT Data Entry Work: The United States Part of the International Study
The United States MEPS ( musculoskeletal — eyestrain — psychosocial — stress ) study consisted of 1 group of 28 female data entry operators . The intervention was in 3 parts : workstation re design ( including advanced ergonomic chairs , motorized adjustable workstations , advanced adjustable keyboards , adjustable copyholders , adjustable footrests , monitor support surfaces ) and ergonomic training/coaching and corrective lenses . After the intervention , statistically significant reductions in physical signs ( trigger points , neck and shoulder mobility ) , subjective reports of intensity and frequency of musculoskeletal pain , and subjective reports of visual problems were observed . Static load during the work sample , as assessed by experts , improved after the intervention as did measured postural angles of head and trunk and subjective assessment of users of ergonomic characteristics of the workplaces . For all of these measures , improvements observed 1 month after intervention were also observed in the 1-year follow-up . Trapezius load , as assessed by electromyography ( EMG ) , decreased after intervention , but then increased in the follow-up . The increase was interpreted as a calibration problem
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 ? ”