The association of different types of stress, and stress accumulation with low back pain in call-center workers - a cross-sectional observational study.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1186/s12891-024-08087-5
Michael Brenner-Fliesser, Sanne Houtenbos, Marie Ewerton, Carolin Bontrup, Rosa Visscher, William R Taylor, Roland Zemp, Pia-Maria Wippert
{"title":"The association of different types of stress, and stress accumulation with low back pain in call-center workers - a cross-sectional observational study.","authors":"Michael Brenner-Fliesser, Sanne Houtenbos, Marie Ewerton, Carolin Bontrup, Rosa Visscher, William R Taylor, Roland Zemp, Pia-Maria Wippert","doi":"10.1186/s12891-024-08087-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low back pain (LBP) is a common health complaint and a prominent factor in the development of LBP among the working population is stress. Mostly, stress is addressed as a general problem, which is why LBP prevention programs are often imprecise. Accordingly, a closer look at the association between specific stress types and the development of LBP is necessary. Therefore, this paper aims (1) to identify the stress types most closely associated with LBP; (2) to examine the relationship between stress accumulation and LBP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>n = 100 call-center workers were approached for participation. Stress levels and LBP were assessed with questionnaires (TICS, ERI, CPG, BPI) and hair cortisol levels were measured (ELISA-KIT, 3-months period). Mann-Whitney U tests were used to identify stress types most closely associated with LBP. Further, ANCOVA analysis was conducted to determine the association of the number of experienced stress types with LBP intensity and impairment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Finally, data from n = 68 participants (mean age: 43.2 (± 12.8) years; 62% female) were used for presented analysis. Participants, who were affected by work-related stress showed higher pain severity (excessive demands at work: 23.6 ± 21.8 vs. 42.4 ± 25.0 (p = 0.005)) and more impairment (excessive demands at work: 13.7 ± 17.6 vs. 28.7 ± 22.3 (p = 0.003); work overload: 15.4 ± 20.4 vs. 26.3 ± 17.4 (p = 0.009)) than their less affected colleagues. Other stress types (e.g. Effort, Reward) showed no significant association with LBP. Furthermore, participants who experienced two or more of the most associated stress types simultaneously suffered from stronger pain and more impairment (p < 0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results suggest that it is essential to divide and evaluate stress in specific domains. Furthermore, the accumulation of different stress types and the resulting physiological load should be taken into account when designing prevention and intervention programs. Results may be of high relevance for the development of LBP prevention programs for people within a predominantly sitting working context.</p>","PeriodicalId":9189,"journal":{"name":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","volume":"25 1","pages":"971"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-08087-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a common health complaint and a prominent factor in the development of LBP among the working population is stress. Mostly, stress is addressed as a general problem, which is why LBP prevention programs are often imprecise. Accordingly, a closer look at the association between specific stress types and the development of LBP is necessary. Therefore, this paper aims (1) to identify the stress types most closely associated with LBP; (2) to examine the relationship between stress accumulation and LBP.

Methods: n = 100 call-center workers were approached for participation. Stress levels and LBP were assessed with questionnaires (TICS, ERI, CPG, BPI) and hair cortisol levels were measured (ELISA-KIT, 3-months period). Mann-Whitney U tests were used to identify stress types most closely associated with LBP. Further, ANCOVA analysis was conducted to determine the association of the number of experienced stress types with LBP intensity and impairment.

Results: Finally, data from n = 68 participants (mean age: 43.2 (± 12.8) years; 62% female) were used for presented analysis. Participants, who were affected by work-related stress showed higher pain severity (excessive demands at work: 23.6 ± 21.8 vs. 42.4 ± 25.0 (p = 0.005)) and more impairment (excessive demands at work: 13.7 ± 17.6 vs. 28.7 ± 22.3 (p = 0.003); work overload: 15.4 ± 20.4 vs. 26.3 ± 17.4 (p = 0.009)) than their less affected colleagues. Other stress types (e.g. Effort, Reward) showed no significant association with LBP. Furthermore, participants who experienced two or more of the most associated stress types simultaneously suffered from stronger pain and more impairment (p < 0.01).

Conclusions: The results suggest that it is essential to divide and evaluate stress in specific domains. Furthermore, the accumulation of different stress types and the resulting physiological load should be taken into account when designing prevention and intervention programs. Results may be of high relevance for the development of LBP prevention programs for people within a predominantly sitting working context.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同类型的压力和压力积累与呼叫中心工作人员腰背痛的关系--一项横断面观察研究。
背景:腰背痛(LBP)是一种常见的健康问题,在工作人群中,压力是导致腰背痛的一个主要因素。大多数情况下,压力是作为一个普遍问题来处理的,这就是为什么腰背痛预防计划往往不够精确。因此,有必要对特定压力类型与枸杞多糖症发展之间的关联进行更深入的研究。因此,本文旨在(1)确定与枸杞痛关系最密切的压力类型;(2)研究压力积累与枸杞痛之间的关系。通过问卷(TICS、ERI、CPG、BPI)评估压力水平和枸杞痛,并测量头发皮质醇水平(ELISA-KIT,3 个月)。采用 Mann-Whitney U 检验来确定与枸杞痛关系最密切的压力类型。此外,还进行了方差分析,以确定所经历的压力类型的数量与枸杞痛的强度和损害之间的关系:最后,n = 68 名参与者(平均年龄:43.2(± 12.8)岁;62% 为女性)的数据被用于分析。受工作压力影响的参与者表现出更高的疼痛严重程度(工作要求过高:23.6 ± 21.8 vs. 42.4 ± 25.0 (p = 0.005))和更多的损伤(工作要求过高:13.7 ± 17.6 vs. 42.4 ± 25.0 (p = 0.005)):13.7 ± 17.6 vs. 28.7 ± 22.3 (p = 0.003);工作负担过重:15.4 ± 20.4 vs. 26.3 ± 17.4 (p = 0.009))。其他压力类型(如努力、奖励)与腰背痛没有明显关联。此外,同时经历两种或两种以上最相关压力类型的参与者会遭受更强烈的疼痛和更多的损伤(p 结论:压力类型与枸杞痛的关系并不明显:研究结果表明,有必要对特定领域的压力进行划分和评估。此外,在设计预防和干预计划时,应考虑到不同压力类型的累积以及由此产生的生理负荷。研究结果对于制定以坐着工作为主的人群的腰背痛预防计划具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 医学-风湿病学
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
8.70%
发文量
1017
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The scope of the Journal covers research into rheumatic diseases where the primary focus relates specifically to a component(s) of the musculoskeletal system.
期刊最新文献
Associations between folate intake and knee pain, inflammation mediators and comorbid conditions in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Correction: Early versus delayed mobilization for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (small to large sized tear): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Correlations of strength, proprioception, and dynamic balance to the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool Score among patients with chronic ankle instability: a cross-sectional study. Effects of two posterior procedures for treatment of cervical hyperextension injury with multilevel spinal stenosis: A retrospective study. The association of different types of stress, and stress accumulation with low back pain in call-center workers - a cross-sectional observational study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1