We found inconsistent evidence that the use of an arm support or an alternative mouse may or may not reduce the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs .
For other physical ergonomic interventions there is no evidence of an effect .
For organisational interventions , in the form of supplementary breaks , there is very low- quality evidence of an effect on upper limb discomfort .
For training and multifaceted interventions there is no evidence of an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort .
BACKGROUND Work-related upper limb and neck musculoskeletal disorders ( MSDs ) are one of the most common occupational disorders worldwide .
Studies have shown that the percentage of office workers that suffer from MSDs ranges from 20 to 60 per cent .
The direct and indirect costs of work-related upper limb MSDs have been reported to be high in Europe , Australia , and the United States .
Although ergonomic interventions are likely to reduce the risk of office workers developing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs , the evidence is unclear .
This is an up date of a Cochrane Review which was last published in 2012 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of physical , cognitive and organisational ergonomic interventions , or combinations of those interventions for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs among office workers .
Evaluation of sit-stand workstations in an office setting: a randomised controlled trial
Background Excessive sitting time is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease mortality and morbidity independent of physical activity . This aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a sit-st and workstation on sitting time , and vascular , metabolic and musculoskeletal outcomes in office workers , and to investigate workstation acceptability and feasibility . Methods A two-arm , parallel-group , individually r and omised controlled trial was conducted in one organisation . Participants were asymptomatic full-time office workers aged ≥18 years . Each participant in the intervention arm had a sit-st and workstation installed on their workplace desk for 8 weeks . Participants in the control arm received no intervention . The primary outcome was workplace sitting time , assessed at 0 , 4 and 8 weeks by an ecological momentary assessment diary . Secondary behavioural , cardiometabolic and musculoskeletal outcomes were assessed . Acceptability and feasibility were assessed via question naire and interview . ANCOVA and magnitude-based inferences examined intervention effects relative to controls at 4 and 8 weeks . Participants and research ers were not blind to group allocation . Results Forty-seven participants were r and omised ( intervention n = 26 ; control n = 21 ) . Relative to the control group at 8 weeks , the intervention group had a beneficial decrease in sitting time ( −80.2 min/8-h workday ( 95 % CI = −129.0 , −31.4 ) ; p = 0.002 ) , increase in st and ing time ( 72.9 min/8-h workday ( 21.2 , 124.6 ) ; p = 0.007 ) and decrease in total cholesterol ( −0.40 mmol/L ( −0.79 , −0.003 ) ; p = 0.049 ) . No harmful changes in musculoskeletal discomfort/pain were observed relative to controls , and beneficial changes in flow-mediated dilation and diastolic blood pressure were observed . Most participants self-reported that the workstation was easy to use and their work-related productivity did not decrease when using the device . Factors that negatively influenced workstation use were workstation design , the social environment , work tasks and habits . ConclusionS hort-term use of a feasible sit-st and workstation reduced daily sitting time and led to beneficial improvements in cardiometabolic risk parameters in asymptomatic office workers . These findings imply that if the observed use of the sit-st and workstations continued over a longer duration , sit-st and workstations may have important ramifications for the prevention and reduction of cardiometabolic risk in a large proportion of the working population .Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov NCT02496507
We found inconsistent evidence that the use of an arm support or an alternative mouse may or may not reduce the incidence of neck or shoulder MSDs .
For other physical ergonomic interventions there is no evidence of an effect .
For organisational interventions , in the form of supplementary breaks , there is very low- quality evidence of an effect on upper limb discomfort .
For training and multifaceted interventions there is no evidence of an effect on upper limb pain or discomfort .
BACKGROUND Work-related upper limb and neck musculoskeletal disorders ( MSDs ) are one of the most common occupational disorders worldwide .
Studies have shown that the percentage of office workers that suffer from MSDs ranges from 20 to 60 per cent .
The direct and indirect costs of work-related upper limb MSDs have been reported to be high in Europe , Australia , and the United States .
Although ergonomic interventions are likely to reduce the risk of office workers developing work-related upper limb and neck MSDs , the evidence is unclear .
This is an up date of a Cochrane Review which was last published in 2012 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of physical , cognitive and organisational ergonomic interventions , or combinations of those interventions for the prevention of work-related upper limb and neck MSDs among office workers .