ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2007
Symptomatology of recurrent low back pain in nursing and administrative professions.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The association between occupational loading and spine degeneration on imaging - a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Pooled it
- Exposure to psychosocial risk factors in the context of work: a systematic review.Revista de saude publica · 2016Pooled it
- Stochastic resonance whole-body vibration, musculoskeletal symptoms, and body balance: a worksite training study.Safety and health at work · 2013Article
- A survey of the "surgical and research" articles in the European Spine Journal, 2007.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to explore if (a) recurrent low back pain (LBP) has different symptomatologies in cases from occupations with predominantly sitting postures compared to cases from occupations involving dynamic postures and frequent lifting and (b) if in the two occupational groups, different factors were associated with the presence of recurrent LBP. Hundred and eleven female subjects aged between 45 and 62 years with a long-standing occupation either in administrative or nursing professions, with and without recurrent LBP were examined. An extensive evaluation of six areas of interest (pain and disability, clinical examination, functional tests, MR examination, physical and psychosocial workplace factors) was performed. The variables from the six areas of interest were analyzed for their potential to discriminate between the four groups of subjects (administrative worker and nurses with and without recurrent LBP) by canonical discriminant analysis. As expected, the self-evaluation of physical and psychosocial workplace factors showed significant differences between the two occupational groups, which holds true for cases as well as for controls (P < 0.01). The functional tests revealed a tendency for rather good capacity in nurses with LBP and a decreased capacity in administrative personnel with LBP (P = 0.049). Neither self completed pain and disability questionnaires nor clinical examination or MR imaging revealed any significant difference between LBP cases from sedentary and non-sedentary occupations. When comparing LBP cases and controls within the two occupational groups, the functional tests revealed significant differences (P = 0.0001) yet only in administrative personnel. The clinical examination on the other hand only discriminated between LBP cases and controls in the nurses group (P < 0.0001). Neither MRI imaging nor self reported physical and psychosocial workplace factors discriminated between LBP cases and controls from both occupational groups. Although we used a battery of tests that have broad application in clinical and epidemiological studies of LBP, a clear difference in the pattern of symptoms between LBP cases from nursing and hospital administration personnel could not be ascertained. We conclude that there is no evidence for different mechanisms leading to non-specific, recurrent LBP in the two occupations, and thus no generalizable recommendations for the prevention and therapy of non-specific LBP in the two professions can be given.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.