Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Workplace Interventions for Workers with Musculoskeletal Disabilities: A Descriptive Review of Content

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: Despite the convergence of scientific data to the effect that interventions in the workplace promote a healthy return to work, the interventions carried out in the real work environment appear to be very heterogeneous and ill-defined. Objective: The goal of this review is to identify the different objectives pursued through the workplace interventions carried out in the context of a rehabilitation program, and to describe the activities involved. Methods: A descriptive review of the literature, including various research designs, was carried out. Results: This review reveals great heterogeneity in the content of interventions offered in the workplace to workers with musculoskeletal disabilities. The objectives of workplace interventions may range from gathering information in order to reproduce work demands in a clinical setting, to gradually exposing workers to the demands of the real work environment, or permanently reducing the demands of the work situation. A descriptive analysis of the literature also brings to light the diversity of actions carried out, human resources used, and workplace environments involved, while highlighting the few documented process outcome evaluations that have been done of workplace interventions. Conclusion: It is recommended that in future research in this area, efforts be made to better describe the components of the interventions, to develop process outcomes representing the multidimensional results obtained in the workplace, and to differentiate between temporary and permanent modifications made to the work situation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Deyo RA, Tsui-Wu YJ. Descriptive epidemiology of low back pain and its related medical care in the United States. Spine 1987;12:264–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. CSST. Statistiques sur les affections vertébrales, 1998–2001. Québec, QC: CSST; 2002.

  3. CSST. Statistiques sur les lésions en “ITE” du système musculo-squelettique, 1998–2001. Québec, QC: CSST; 2002.

  4. Van Tulder MW, Koes BW, Bouter LM. A Cost-of-Illness Study of Back Pain in the Netherlands. Pain 1995;62:233–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Nachemson A. Back pain: Delimiting the problem in the next millennium. Int J Law Psychiatry 1999;22:473–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Frank J, Sinclair S, Hogg-Johnson S, et al. Preventing disability from work-related low-back pain - new evidence gives new hope - If we can just get all the players onside. Can Med Assoc J 1998;158:1625–31.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Krause N, Dasinger LK, Neuhauser F. Modified work and return to work: a review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil 1998;8:113–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Loisel P, Abenhaim L, Durand P, et al. A population-based, randomized clinical trial on back pain management. Spine 1997;22:2911–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Yassi A, Tate R, Cooper JE, et al. Early intervention for back-injured nurses at a large Canadian tertiary care hospital: an evaluation of the effectiveness and cost benefits of a two-year pilot project. Occup Med (Lond) 1995;45:209–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lindstrom I, Ohlund C, Eek C, et al. The effect of graded activity on patients with subacute low back pain: a randomized prospective clinical study with an operant-conditioning behavioral approach. Phys Ther 1992;72:279–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Anema JR, Steenstra IA, Urlings IJM, et al. Participatory Ergonomics as a Return-to-Work Intervention: a future challenge? Am J Ind Med 2003;44:273–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Staal JB, Hlobil H, van Tulder MW, et al. Return-to-work interventions for low back pain - A descriptive review of contents and concepts of working mechanisms. Sports Med 2002;32:251–67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen H-T. Issues in constructing program theory. New directions for program evaluation 1990;47:7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Rossi PH, Freeman HE, Lipsey MW. Expressing and Assessing Program Theory. In: Evaluation- A systematic approach. 6th ed: Sage Publications; 2004. p. 155–88.

  15. Weiss C. How can theory-based evaluation make greater headway? Eval Rev 1997;21:501–24.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Kishino N, et al. Objective assessment of spine function following industrial injury. A prospective study with comparison group and one-year follow-up. Spine 1985;10:482–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Mayer H, et al. A prospective two-year study of functional restoration in industrial low back injury: an objective assessment procedure. JAMA 1987;258:1763–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ. Functional restoration for chronic low back pain. In: Tolisson CD, Kriegel CD, editors. Interdisciplinary rehabilitation of low back pain. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkin; 1989. p. 343–53.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Contandriopoulos AP, Champagne F, Denis JL, et al. L’évaluation dans le domaine de la santé: concepts et méthodes. Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2000;48:517–24.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gauthier B. Recherche sociale: de la problématique à la collecte de données. 3rd ed. Québec: Presses de l’Université du Québec; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Haldorsen EMH, Grasdal AL, Skouen JS, et al. Is there a right treatment for a particular patient group? Comparison of ordinary treatment, light multidisciplinary treatment, and extensive multidisciplinary treatment for long-term sick-listed employees with musculoskeletal pain. Pain 2002;95:49–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van den Hout JHC, Vlaeyen JWS, Heuts P, et al. Secondary prevention of work-related disability in nonspecific low back pain: Does problem-solving therapy help? A randomized clinical trial. Clin J Pain 2003;19:87–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Anema JR, Cuelenaere B, van der Beek AJ, et al. The effectiveness of ergonomic interventions on return-to-work after low back pain; a prospective two year cohort study in six countries on low back pain patients sicklisted for 3–4-months. Occupational & Environmental Medicine 2004;61:289–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Arnetz BB, Sjogren B, Rydéhn B, et al. Early Workplace Intervention for Employees With Musculoskeletal-Related Absenteeism: A Prospective Controlled Intervention Study. J Occup Environ Med 2003;45:499–506.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bernacki EJ, Guidera JA, Schaefer JA, et al. A facilitated early return to work program at a large urban medical center. J Occup Environ Med 2000;42:1172–77.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Davis PM, Badii M, Yassi A. Preventing disability from occupational musculoskeletal injuries in an urban, acute and tertiary care hospital: results from a prevention and early active return-to-work safely program. J Occup Environ Med 2004;46:1253–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Edwards BC, Zusman M, Hardcastle P, et al. A physical approach to the rehabilitation of patients disabled by chronic low back pain. Med J Aust 1992;156:167–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ekberg K, Bjorkqvist B, Malm P, et al. Controlled two year follow up of rehabilitation for disorders in the neck and shoulders. Occup Environ Med 1994;51:833–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Feuerstein M, Callan-Harris S, Hickey P, et al. Multidisciplinary rehabilitation of chronic work-related upper extremity disorders. Long-term effects. J Occup Med 1993;35:396–403.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Haldorsen EMH, Kronholm K, Skouen JS, et al. Multimodal cognitive behavioral treatment of patients sicklisted for musculoskeletal pain - a randomized controlled study. Scand J Rheumatol 1998;27:16–25.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Skouen JS, Grasdal AL, Haldorsen EMH, et al. Relative cost-effectiveness of extensive and light multidisciplinary treatment programs versus treatment as usual for patients with chronic low back pain on long-term sick leave: randomized controlled study. Spine 2002;27:901–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Loisel P, Durand P, Abenhaim L, et al. Management of occupational back pain: the Sherbrooke model. Results of a pilot and feasibility study. Occup Environ Med 1994;51:597–602.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Loisel P, Gosselin L, Durand P, et al. Implementation of a participatory ergonomics program in the rehabilitation of workers suffering from subacute back pain. Appl Ergon 2001;32:53–60.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Nordstrom-Bjorverud G, Moritz U. Interdisciplinary rehabilitation of hospital employees with musculoskeletal disorders. Scand J Rehabil Med 1998;30:31–7.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shaw WS, Feuerstein M, Miller VI, et al. Clinical tools to facilitate workplace accommodation after treatment for an upper extremity disorder. Assist Technol 2001;13:94–105.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Lincoln AE, Feuerstein M, Shaw WS, et al. Impact of case manager training on worksite accommodations in workers’ compensation claimants with upper extremity disorders. J Occup Environ Med 2002;44:237–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cooper JE, Tate R, Yassi A. Work hardening in an early return to work program for nurses with back injury. Work 1997;8:149–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Mucchielli A. Dictionnaire des méthodes qualitatives en sciences humaines et sociales. Paris: Armand Colin; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Spitzer WO, et al. Scientific approach to the assessment and management of the activity-related spinal disorders. A monograph for clinicians. Report of the Quebec Task Force on Spinal Disorders. Spine 1987;12:59.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Baril R, Clarke J, Friesen M, et al. Work-ready group. Management of return-to-work programs for workers with musculoskeletal disorders : a qualitative study in three Canadian provinces. Soc Sci Med 2003;57:2101–14.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. St-Vincent M, Toulouse G, Bellemare M. Démarches d’ergonomie participative pour réduire les risques de troubles musculo-squelettiques: bilans et réflexions. PISTES 2000;2:34.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lamonde F. L’intervention ergonomique. Un regard sur la pratique professionnelle. Toulouse, France: Éditions Octares; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Baril-Gingras G, Bellemare M, Brun J-P. Intervention externe en santé et en sécurité du travail : un modèle pour comprendre la production de transformations à partir de l’analyse d’interventions d’associations sectorielles paritaires. Études et recherches. Montréal: IRSST; 2004. Report No.: R–367.

  44. Waddell G, Burton AK. Occupational health guidelines for the management of low back pain at work: evidence review. Occup Med (Lond) 2001;51:124–35.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Baril R, Berthelette D. Components and Organizational Determinants of Workplace Interventions Designed to Facilitate Early Return to Work. Montreal: Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST); 2000. Report No.: R–263.

  46. St-Vincent M, Chicoine D, Beaugrand S. Validation d’une démarche d’ergonomie participative dans deux industries du secteur électrique. Études et recherches. Montréal: Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST); 1996. Report No.: R–126.

  47. Garrigou A, Daniellou F, Carballeda G, et al. Activity analysis in participatory design and analysis of participatory design activity. Int J Ind Ergon 1995;15:311–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors wish to thank the Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST) for subsidizing this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Action in Work Disability Prevention and Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke, 1111 St-Charles Street West, Room 101, Longueuil, Québec, Canada

    M. J. Durand, P. Loisel, M. C. Richard & B. Diallo

  2. Department of Community Health Sciences, Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

    M. J. Durand

  3. Department of Kinanthropology, Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), Montréal, Québec, Canada

    N. Vézina

  4. Department of Surgery (Division of Orthopedics), Université de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

    P. Loisel

  5. Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST), Montréal, Québec, Canada

    R. Baril

Authors
  1. M. J. Durand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N. Vézina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Loisel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. R. Baril
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. M. C. Richard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. B. Diallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. J. Durand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Durand, M.J., Vézina, N., Loisel, P. et al. Workplace Interventions for Workers with Musculoskeletal Disabilities: A Descriptive Review of Content. J Occup Rehabil 17, 123–136 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-006-9036-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-006-9036-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation