Trial reportBMC medical research methodology2014
Adoption of workplaces and reach of employees for a multi-faceted intervention targeting low back pain among nurses' aides.
Trial report in BMC medical research methodology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors for adherence to a physical activity promotion program in the workplace: a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Middle managers' role in implementing evidence-based practices in healthcare: a systematic review.Implementation science : IS · 2018Pooled it
- Operationalizing a model to quantify implementation of a multi-component intervention in a stepped-wedge trial.Implementation science : IS · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Staying at Work with Musculoskeletal Pain in a Physically Demanding Job: A Qualitative Exploration of Workers' and Managers' Perspectives.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Perceived Factors Influencing Blue-Collar Workers' Participation in Worksite Health Promotion Programs in Freight Transport: A Qualitative Investigation Using the TDF and COM-B.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Advantages and disadvantages of mobile applications for workplace health promotion: A scoping review.PloS one · 2024Article
- Scoping review meets expert interviews: Key issues of multimodal programs for workplace health promotion in long-term care facilities -Health promotion perspectives · 2024Article
- Pain management in eldercare employees - the role of managers in addressing musculoskeletal pain and pain-related sickness absence.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Attending work with chronic pain is associated with higher levels of psychosocial stress.Canadian journal of pain = Revue canadienne de la douleur · 2021Article
- Enabling Work: Occupational Therapy Interventions for Persons with Occupational Injuries and Diseases: A Scoping Review.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2018Article
- The role of managers in addressing employees with musculoskeletal pain: a mixed methods study.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2018Article
- Article
- Do working environment interventions reach shift workers?International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2016Article
- Trauma nurses' experience of repositioning practice for trauma patients: a qualitative descriptive study.Revista CuidarteArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWorkplace adoption and reach of health promotion are important, but generally poorly reported. The aim of this study is therefore to evaluate the adoption of workplaces (organizational level) and reach of employees (individual level) of a multi-faceted workplace health promotion and work environment intervention targeting low back pain among nurses' aides in elderly care.
methodsPercentage of adopters was calculated among eligible workplaces and differences between adopters and non-adopters were evaluated through workplace registrations and manager questionnaires from all eligible workplaces. From the adopted workplaces reach was calculated among eligible employees as the percentage who responded on a questionnaire. Responders were compared with non-responders using data from company registrations. Among responders, comparisons based on questionnaire data were performed between those consenting to participate in the intervention (consenters) and those not consenting to participate in the intervention (non-consenters). Comparisons were done using Student's t-test for the continuous variables, Fisher's exact test for dichotomous variables and the Pearson's chi(2) for categorical variables. Moreover odds ratios for non-responding and non-consenting were investigated with binary logistic regression analyses.
resultsThe project was adopted by 44% of the offered workplaces. The main differences between adopters and non-adopters were that workplaces adopting the intervention had a more stable organization as well as a management with positive beliefs of the intervention's potential benefits. Of eligible employees, 71% responded on the questionnaire and 57% consented to participate. Non-responders and non-consenters did not differ from the responders and consenters on demographic factors and health. However, more non-responders and non-consenters were low skilled, worked less than 30 hours pr. week, and worked evening and nightshift compared to responders and consenters, respectively. Consenters had more musculoskeletal pain and reduced self-rated health, as well as higher physical exertion during work compared to non-consenters.
conclusionsOur recruitment effort yielded a population of consenters that was representative of the target population of nurses' aides with respect to demographic factors, and health. Moreover more consenters had problems like pain and high physical exertion during work, which fitted the scope of the intervention.
trial registrationThe study is registered as ISRCTN78113519.
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.