Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38539214›Full record

ArticleJournal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England)2024

Impact of sitting at work on musculoskeletal complaints of German workers - results from the study on mental health at work (S-MGA).

T H An Dang, Karla Romero Starke, Falk Liebers, Hermann Burr, Andreas Seidler, Janice Hegewald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

T H An DangInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Karla Romero StarkeInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Falk LiebersDivision 3: Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Hermann BurrDivision 3: Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany.
Andreas SeidlerInstitute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine (IPAS), Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Janice HegewaldDivision 3: Work and Health, Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Berlin, Germany. Hegewald.Janice@baua.bund.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSedentary behavior (including prolonged sitting) is a form of physical inactivity that has a negative impact on health, possibly including musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs). The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which time spent sitting at work is associated with the one-year prevalence of MSCs in the neck, shoulder, upper back/thoracic spine, and lower back among workers from the Study of Mental Health in the Workplace (S-MGA). In addition, the study also examined whether leisure time, physical activity, and sex modify the relationship between occupational sitting and MSCs.

methodsFor this analysis, we used the S-MGA, a 5-year prospective study in Germany. The S-MGA is a nationwide representative employee cohort study with a baseline survey in 2012 and a follow-up survey in 2017. Sitting at work was measured using a question asked at baseline. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was used to determine the one-year prevalence of MSCs in the neck, shoulder, upper back, and lower back pain (yes/no). The assessment of MSCs was only conducted at the 2017 follow-up. Adjusted Poisson regression models were used to determine the association of baseline level of weekly hours spent sitting at work with MSCs during follow-up. In addition to unadjusted models, models were adjusted for demographic (age, sex, body mass index and occupational skill level), occupational (heavy lifting at work), psychological disorders and lifestyle factors (smoking status and leisure time physical activity), as well as preexisting musculoskeletal conditions reported at baseline. To examine whether the relationship between sitting time and pain was modified by sex and leisure time physical activity, the models were stratified for both these variables.

resultsAmong the participants analyzed (n = 2,082), 49.8% were male, while 50.2% were female, and more than 60% of the study population spent over half of their working hours in a sitting position. Exposure to increased sitting at work reported at baseline was not consistently associated with 12-month prevalence of MSCs in the upper body at follow-up. However, differences in the association between occupational sitting and MSCs were dependent on the intensity of leisure time physical activity. Prevalence ratios (PRs) indicated an increased prevalence of MSC in the neck (PR = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.18-1.80) and shoulder (PR = 1.30; 95% CI = 1.03-1.64) in workers without leisure time physical activity who spent 25 to < 35 weekly working hours sitting. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that leisure time physical activity interacts with the relationship between sitting at work and MSCs. The relationship between sitting at work and musculoskeletal pain needs further investigation, but we found indications that leisure time physical activity may counter the effects of sitting at work.

Indexed as

Longitudinal studiesMusculoskeletalOccupational sittingPainPhysical workSedentary

Identifiers

PMID38539214
PMCPMC10967152

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.