Register for email alerts and news feeds:
This journal | BMJ Group
rss
The most recent version of this article was published on 1 July 2008

Occup Environ Med. Published Online First: 8 November 2007. doi:10.1136/oem.2007.034801
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

Original Article

Developing common metrics of mechanical exposures across etiologic studies of low back pain in working populations for use in meta-analysis

Lauren E. Griffith 1*, Richard P. Wells 2, Harry S. Shannon 1, Stephen D. Walter 1, Donald C. Cole 3 and Sheilah Hogg-Johnson 4

1 McMaster University, Canada
2 University of Waterloo, Canada
3 University of Toronto, Canada
4 Institute for Work and Health, Canada

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: griffith{at}mcmaster.ca.

Accepted 26 October 2007


Abstract

Objectives: One of the challenges of conducting meta-analyses on the relationship between workplace mechanical exposures and low back pain is that mechanical exposures are reported in a wide variety of ways. We aimed to develop common metrics to apply in the translation of literature-based workplace mechanical exposures for use in meta-analyses, and to test the metrics’ measurement properties. Methods: We developed a set of 7-point scales to capture the intensity of important aspects of mechanical exposures that may be related to the development of low back pain in workers. The scales represented three dimensions of mechanical exposures at work: 1) trunk posture, 2) weight lifted or force exerted and 3) spinal loading, and estimated both peak and cumulative loads. Measurement properties of the scales were tested through a survey of experts in biomechanics and ergonomics who were asked to rate literature-based workplace exposure definitions using the scales and provide estimates of their confidence in their ratings. Results: For each dimension the ratings for peak loads tended to be higher than the cumulative load ratings. The inter-rater reliability for the scales ranged from 0.3 to 0.5; we would need to average the ratings of at least four expert raters to have an acceptable level of reliability (>0.7). Inter-expert reliability was positively related to the experts’ level of confidence in their ratings. In most cases the ranking of intensity ratings from the experts matched the ranking of exposure intensity from the original articles. Conclusions: This study provides insight into estimating the intensity of literature-based mechanical exposure metrics using a common set of scales which can be applied across epidemiologic studies. These metrics may be useful to quantify the relationship between workplace mechanical exposure and low back pain in a systematic review and meta-analysis. Abstract Word Count: 292

Keywords: biomechanics, low back pain, meta-analysis, observer variation


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Palmer, K. (2008). Work in Brief. Occup. Environ. Med. 65: i-i [Full Text]  

This Article

Services
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Bookmark with

Register for free content

The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.

Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.

Occupational, Public, Community health jobs

Occupational, Public, Community health jobs