ArticleWiener klinische Wochenschrift2015
Non-specific low back pain: occupational or lifestyle consequences?
Article in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of Lifestyle Interventions on the Improvement of Chronic Non-Specific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Association between sedentary behavior and low back pain; A systematic review and meta-analysis.Health promotion perspectives · 2021Review
- Influence of occupation on lumbar spine degeneration in men: the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2010-2013.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNursing occupation was identified as a risk occupation for the development of low back pain (LBP). The aim of our study was to find out how much occupational factors influence the development of LBP in hospital nursing personnel. PATIENTS AND
methodsNon-experimental approach with a cross-sectional survey and statistical analysis. Nine hundred questionnaires were distributed among nursing personnel, 663 were returned and 659 (73.2 %) were considered for the analysis. Univariate and multivariate statistics for LBP risk was calculated by the binary logistic regression. The χ(2), influence factor, 95 % confidence interval and P value were calculated. Multivariate binary logistic regression was calculated by the Wald method to omit insignificant variables.
resultsNot performing exercises represented the highest risk for the development of LBP (OR 2.8, 95 % CI 1.7-4.4; p < 0.001). The second and third ranked risk factors were frequent manual lifting > 10 kg (OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.5-3.8; p < 0.001) and duration of employment ≥ 19 years (OR 2.4, 95 % CI 1.6-3.7; p < 0.001). The fourth ranked risk factor was better physical condition by frequent recreation and sports, which reduced the risk for the development of LBP (OR 0.4, 95 % CI 0.3-0.7; p = 0.001). Work with the computer ≥ 2 h per day as last significant risk factor also reduced the risk for the development of LBP (OR 0.6, 95 % CI 0.4-0.1; p = 0.049).
conclusionRisk factors for LBP established in our study (exercises, duration of employment, frequent manual lifting, recreation and sports and work with the computer) are not specifically linked to the working environment of the nursing personnel. Rather than focusing on mechanical causes and direct workload in the development of non-specific LBP, the complex approach to LBP including genetics, psychosocial environment, lifestyle and quality of life is coming more to the fore.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25821057What 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.