ArticleAnnals of work exposures and health2026
Trunk and upper arm postures and movements among older workers in physically demanding occupations.
Article in Annals of work exposures and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionAssociations between work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) and awkward postures and repetitive movements have been established. Action levels for elevated arms, trunk flexion, and fast movements have been suggested. With today's prolonged working life, older workers in manual jobs may be at increased risk for WMSDs. The aim of this study was therefore to assess postural workload in older workers in four physically demanding occupational groups using technical measurements and compare the exposure of the groups with each other's and with the action level.
methodsPostures and movements were measured for the right upper arm and the trunk using inertial measurement units (IMUs) during 3 workdays in construction workers (n = 35), kitchen workers (n = 37), cleaners (n = 27), and assistant nurses (n = 25), all over 50 years. Angle and angular velocity were computed, and time exceeding suggested angular cut-offs was assessed. Group mean and variance components within and between subjects were estimated in one-way random effect models. One-way ANOVA tests were conducted to compare exposure variables between the occupational groups.
resultsConstruction workers spent more time with arms >60° than other occupational groups (7.9% vs. 4.4-5.6%) and >90° (2.8% vs. 1.0-1.3%). Across groups, a substantial share of days exceeded suggested action level for arm elevation >30° (8.0-24.6%) and >60° (6.3-22.7%). Cleaners had the highest 50th percentile trunk flexion (15.3°), while construction workers spent the most time with trunk flexion >45° (12.6%) and >60° (7.4%); exceedances of recommended levels occurred in up to 39% of days. Kitchen workers and cleaners exhibited more time with fast arm movements (31.8-35.6% vs. 23.9-24.0%). Considerable variability was observed both within and between individuals.
conclusionIn the included occupational groups, in workers over 50 years, arm elevation and trunk flexion may often exceed recommended levels. Since the physical capacity is decreasing with age, this indicates elevated musculoskeletal risks, and there is a clear need for targeted ergonomic measures to support sustainable working lives.
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.