Trial reportJournal of occupational rehabilitation2009
Prognostic factors for intervention effect on neck/shoulder symptom intensity and disability among female computer workers.
Trial report in Journal of occupational rehabilitation, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Workplace interventions for neck pain in workers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIt has been suggested that treatments may be more effective when they are matched to patient characteristics. This study aimed at investigating potential prognostic factors for clinically relevant improvement in symptom intensity and symptom-related disability among employees with symptoms in the neck/shoulder area, receiving either ergonomics counseling or such counseling in combination with myofeedback training.
methodsA randomized controlled study was performed among female computer users aged 45 or older (n = 36). A clinical examination and a questionnaire survey were performed before inclusion in the study. Symptom intensity and disability was assessed using questionnaires before the start of the interventions (baseline) and at follow-ups directly after the end of the interventions (T0) and after 3 (T3) and 6 (T6) months. Logistic regression analyses were performed in order to assess prognostic factors for clinically relevant improvement in symptom intensity and disability.
resultsImprovement in symptom intensity was consistently predicted by symptom intensity at baseline. Diagnosis and stress-induced lack of muscular rest were prognostic factors for improvement in symptom intensity at short term follow-up. Baseline disability and passive coping consistently served as prognostic factors for outcome in disability. Few substantial differences were found between the interventions in terms of prognostic factors.
conclusionsMyofeedback training in combination with ergonomics counseling seem to be an especially beneficial tool for secondary prevention among employees with moderate levels of symptom intensity and symptom-related disability, who respond to work-related stress by increased/sustained muscle activation, and who tend to employ passive coping to deal with their neck/shoulder symptoms.
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.