ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2016
Opting to wear prismatic spectacles was associated with reduced neck pain in dental personnel: a longitudinal cohort study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organisational-level risk and health-promoting factors within the healthcare sector-a systematic search and review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Prevention of Musculoskeletal Diseases and Pain among Dental Professionals through Ergonomic Interventions: A Systematic Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Pooled it
- Ergonomics and performance of using prismatic loupes in simulated surgical tasks among surgeons - a randomized controlled, cross-over trial.Frontiers in public health · 2023Trial
- Effectiveness of Ergonomic Training to Decrease Awkward Postures during Dental Scaling Procedures: A Randomized Clinical Trial.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Trial
- Survey on the usage and frequency of digital magnification devices in dentistry.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Recommendations for Improving Ergonomics in Cleft Palate and Lip Surgery: A Scoping Review.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2025Review
- A Change Management Approach to Promoting and Endorsing Ergonomics within a Dental Setting.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Musculoskeletal discomfort in veterinary healthcare professions.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2022Article
- Neck and upper extremity pain in sonographers - a longitudinal study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Magnification in endodontics: A review of its application and acceptance among dental practitioners.European journal of dentistryReview
- Knowledge, attitude and practice regarding the use of dental operating microscope in pediatric dentistry in India: An online survey.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate effects on perceived exertion, work ability self-reported neck pain and clinically diagnosed conditions in the neck, of an intervention with prismatic spectacles among dental personnel.
methodsIn this cohort study a baseline questionnaire including questions about frequency of neck pain, perceived exertion during work and background information was distributed to dental personnel in municipal dental care units. In connection, personnel from 78 out of 110 dental care units underwent a clinical neck examination and rated their perceived work ability with the single-item question from the Work Ability Index. The study population consisted of 564 participants; 366 in the questionnaire group, 321 in the examination group, whereof 123 participated in both assessments. In total 371 belonged to the intervention group and received individually adjusted prismatic spectacles after the baseline assessments (inclusion based on self-selection) and 193 belonged to the reference group. At the 12-month follow-up the clinical examination was repeated and the same questionnaire with additional questions was completed. Fisher's exact test or the Mann-Whitney U test was used to assess differences between the intervention group and the reference group at baseline. Differences at follow up between the two groups were assessed by means of Linear-by Linear association test for trends.
resultsA significant decrease in neck pain (p = 0.047), clinical diagnoses in the neck (p = 0.025), and perceived exertion (p = 0.003) was observed at follow up for the intervention group compared to the reference group. Moreover, for the intervention group a significantly improved self-rated work ability (p = 0.040) was reported. Finally, opting to wear prismatic spectacles during dental work appeared to have a preventive effect on neck pain.
conclusionsDental personnel opting to wear prismatic spectacles reduced their neck pain significantly more at follow up compared with the reference group. These results are worthwhile testing in a randomised design. The practical implication of this study is that recommendations regarding ergonomics for dental professionals may include the use of prismatic glasses, both as primary and secondary prevention of work-related neck pain. Such glasses should also be tested in other working situations where the work tasks include high visual demands in sustained awkward neck postures.
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.