Risk factors and musculoskeletal complaints in non-specialized nurses, IC nurses, operation room nurses, and X-ray technologists

Abstract

Objectives: To gain more insight into the prevalence rates of musculoskeletal complaints of neck-shoulder and low back and to determine the relation between physical and psychosocial work-related risk factors and the complaints mentioned in non-specialized nurses, operation room nurses, Intensive Care (IC) nurses and X-ray technologists. Methods: The study population consists of 3,169 employees affiliated to eight university hospitals in the Netherlands. The study was conducted using a cross-sectional survey design. The parameters under study were having or having had (severe) low back or neck-shoulder complaints during the past year. In logistic regression analyses odds ratio’s and CI 95% were estimated for all relevant risk factors for each of the four professional groups. Results: In all groups prevalence rates of musculoskeletal complaints were high: low back 76%, neck-shoulder 60%. Operation room nurses perceived more neck-shoulder complaints (12 months prevalence) than non-specialized nurses and IC nurses perceived less severe low back complaints than non-specialized nurses. Four physical risk factors and one psychosocial factor were associated with low back complaints in all groups. Conclusions: The results of the present study indicate that both low back complaints and neck-shoulder complaints are major health problems in the four professional groups under study. The prevalence rate of neck-shoulder complaints in operation room nurses is higher than in non-specialized nurses and IC nurses, the latter groups having high prevalence rates already. The exposure to risk factors is perceived differently by each of the professional groups. The professional groups under study all are target for preventive interventions; these interventions need to be specified for each of the professional groups.

Appendix

The Dutch musculoskeletal questionnaire (DMQ): five physical and five psychosocial factors (Hildebrandt et al. 2001)

Factor	N items	Content	Cronbach’s alphaa	Cronbach’s alpha
Force exertion	13	Lifting, pushing and pulling, carrying, forceful movements with arms, high physical exertion, lifting with loads above the chest, lifting with bad grip, lifting with very heavy loads, short force exertion, exerting great force in hands	0.86	0.90b
Dynamic load	12	Trunk movements (bending and/or twisting), movements of neck, shoulders or wrists, reaching, make sudden and/or unexpected movements, pinching, working under, at, or, above shoulder level.	0.80	0.82b
Static load	11	Light bent, twisted trunk posture, heavily bent, twisted trunk postures, postures of neck or wrists	0.82	0.87b
Repetitive load	6	Working in the same postures, making the same movements with trunk, arms, hands wrists or legs, making small movements with hands at a high pace	0.80	0.85b
Ergonomic environment	6	Available working space, no support, slipping and falling, trouble with reaching things with tools, not enough room above to perform work without bending	0.70	0.78b
Job content and autonomy	6	Monotony, skill level, challenging, new skills, learn new things, variation	0.68	0.57c
Job demands	6	Work pressure, (problems with) speed of work, fatigue	0.70	0.76c
Work organization	5	Organization degree, work progress, hinder of unexpected situations, presents of colleagues or lack in work of others	0.56	0.58c
Task control	5	Determine workpace, - the order of tasks, make decisions in the job, leave the workplace for a while	0.72	0.67d
Supervisor and colleagues	5	Daily leadership, irritation of others, supervisor pays attention to what I am saying, good work atmosphere, impression of supervisor of my job	0.67	0.78c

1. ^aCronbach’s alpha of present study population
2. ^bCronbach’s alpha of Hildebrandt-study
3. ^cCronbach’s alpha of de Winter and Grundemann study
4. ^dCronbach’s alpha of van der Doef study