The Ergonomic Association between Shoulder, Neck/Head Disorders and Sedentary Activity: A Systematic Review

Guduru, Rama Krishna Reddy; Domeika, Aurelijus; Obcarskas, Linas; Ylaite, Berta

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5178333

Journal of Healthcare Engineering

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusions Abbreviations Data Availability Conflicts of Interest Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 5178333 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5178333

The Ergonomic Association between Shoulder, Neck/Head Disorders and Sedentary Activity: A Systematic Review

Rama Krishna Reddy Guduru,¹Aurelijus Domeika,¹Linas Obcarskas,¹and Berta Ylaite¹

Academic Editor: Emiliano Schena

Received20 Oct 2021

Revised23 Jan 2022

Accepted23 Feb 2022

Published21 Mar 2022

Abstract

Background. Work-associated upper limb and neck disorders are common occupational disorders throughout the world. These disorders are usually observed more in workers who spend a long time sitting, referred to as sedentary activity (SA). The immediate and distorted risk of sedentary-related problems was considered high in Europe, Australia, and the United States. Even though mediation is convenient, it is likely to reduce office workers’ risks of developing cervical and upper body pain due to sedentary work. This systematic review addresses risk factors and evaluates the relationship between SA and upper body disorders in office workers (i.e., shoulder and neck/head). Methods. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles published between January 2010 and August 2021 in the English language. The three keywords “sedentary,” “upper body elements,” and “work” (and their derivatives) were searched to identify studies and carry out this systematic review. The articles were searched so that all three keywords or at least a derivation of each keyword should appear. Findings. Of the 40 articles that met the enclosure criteria, 32 studies examined the association of SA and upper body elements during both office and computer work. However, three articles were evaluated in the sit-stand work environment, and in the remaining five studies, one was evaluated during teaching, two during hospital work, and two during mixed working conditions. Conclusions. Research related to SA focuses mainly on extended risk factors, but there was no focus on other aspects, such as muscle and tendon contractions. As there is a convincing connection between SA and the upper body, our close examination identifies the need to institutionalize a system for collecting, analyzing, and describing the impact and short-term effects of SA on the upper body. Additionally, some suggestions were made to minimize the risk in a sedentary working environment.

1. Introduction

The lifestyle of people has changed vividly over the centuries. Initially, various work conditions were observed in the workplace, but today most people are stuck in the same place forever [1, 2]. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are frequently connected with ergonomic risk factors such as contact stress and uncomfortable posture (changes in normal working posture). MSDs affect the neck, shoulders, and lower back (LB) and significantly impact a person’s well-being and efficiency at work [3–5]. MSD associated with work is 70–80% in industrialized countries, indicating the need for treatment interventions [6, 7].

Upper body complaints have become more widespread among employees. Neck pain (NP) is quite prevalent and can cause physical exertion among office workers than other occupations [8, 9]. The annual frequency of NP in office employees ranges from 42% to 63%, with office workers having the highest incidence of neck problems (17% to 21%) among all other occupations. During a 1-year follow-up, around 34% to 49% of workers report a new beginning of NP [10–12, 12]. NP has a substantial effect on not just individuals but also on industry and society. Shoulder pain (SP) is the third most prevalent MSD among sedentary workers, with about 21% of all complaints. Rotator cuff disorders (RCD) such as bursitis, tendinitis, tendinosis, and degenerative tears are the most common causes. Rotator cuff tears, including tears of full and partial thickness, increase in prevalence over 40 years of age and are often asymptomatic; therefore, it may be appropriate to consider them as degenerative rotator cuff tears [4, 13–15]. In addition, an ongoing report indicates that office workers, especially those who work on personal computers, can also have a high risk of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) [16–19].

Few recent review articles examined the relationship between sedentary activity (SA) and health. Most of this information reported on the relationship between screen time and body composition but did not include other indicators of physical health (i.e., impact on the upper body). Furthermore, the studies on neck, shoulder, and hand problems among computer workers are unclear and difficult to understand. Many root causes of neck, shoulder, and hand problems, including physical exposure (i.e., motionless neck, arm posture, and performing repetitive and monotonous tasks) during work, are yet to be addressed.

As a result, to our knowledge, there are very few systematic reviews that address this particular issue focusing on the effects of SA on the upper body. So, the purpose of this systematic review is to distinguish the appropriate relationship between head, shoulder, and neck (HSN) disorders and SA and to evaluate the risk factors associated with SA, focusing on office workers.

2. Methods

2.1. Search Strategy

PRISMA was used to conduct the review and then to receive information from this systematic review [20]. The following databases were searched for relevant publications: PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. The three keywords “sedentary,” “upper body elements” (head, shoulder, and neck), and “work” (and their derivatives) were required to appear in the title or summary (Table 1). The following filters were applied: “English language,” “studies on humans of all ages,” “academic journals,” “between 2010 and 2021,” and keywords. Upon including the articles following the selection criteria, additional articles were identified by searching other sources.

2.2. Inclusion Criteria

The studies [cross-sectional (CSS) or cohort study (CS) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs)] were used if the following inclusion conditions were met: (1) a cohort of office staff without upper body pain was enrolled at the beginning of the study, (2) the essence of the job should be sedentary, (3) the onset of NSP was measured as a result, (4) reported an association between the physical risk of neck/shoulder due to SW, and (5) full-text articles available in English.

2.3. Exclusion Criteria

Conference proceedings, non-peer-reviewed papers, opinion papers, commentaries, case reports, abstracts, and systematic reviews were omitted from the study [21, 22]. Furthermore, studies were omitted if they were not addressing any physical activity or sedentary behavior.

2.4. Quality Assessment/Risk of Bias

The studies were assessed using a checklist developed by Rhodes et al. [2]. The tool was based on the Cochrane Collaboration’s instrument for assessing the risk of bias. The tool comprised seven questions answered with yes (1) or no (0). A score of 6 to 7 indicates low bias and high quality; 4 to 5 indicate moderate bias and low quality; and 0 to 3 indicates severe bias and low quality [22, 23]. The assessment questions are as follows:(i)Is there a theoretical framework in the study?(ii)Was an objective measure of SA used?(iii)Were the measures of SA reliable (e.g., pretested)?(iv)Was the study able to detect a nontrivial correlation?(v)Was the study design an RCT?(vi)Was the baseline SA considered during the analyses (longitudinal analysis)?(vii)Was appropriate statistical analysis used?

2.4.1. Data Extraction

A reviewer extracted the data, and the accuracy was validated by a second reviewer. Publication characteristics (author, year, study site), study demographics (age, sex, sample size), and evaluated risk factors were all retrieved from the eligible studies (Table 2). In addition, the type of work is distinguished (it must be more than half stable) [24–26]. Finally, the intervention, exploratory control, and various finalized estimates were noted.

3. Results

3.1. Search Results

The electronic database (i.e., Web of Science, Scopus, and PubMed) search yielded 2,680 articles, and 11 were identified from other sources (i.e., Google search). A total of 1425 articles were sorted after eliminating 791 irrelevant keywords and 475 duplicated articles, in which 1346 did not investigate the same case. Moreover, 17 that were systematic reviews, 16 that did not consider distinguishing between SA and physical inactivity, and six that did not contain humans were eliminated from the remaining 79 articles. Finally, 40 articles remained for the current review (Figure 1). Of the 40 articles included in this study, 27 were RCTs, eight were CSSs, four were CSs, and one was a quasi-experimental study (Table 2).

3.2. Methodological Quality Assessment

The quality assessment of the included studies is shown in Table 3. With 19 studies achieving a full score (7/7), the remaining 21 ranged between 4 and 6 [22]. The most typical deficiencies within the studies were as follows:1Fifteen did not pretest the SA reliability.2Eleven studies did not use baseline SA in the analysis.3Two studies did not achieve a nontrivial correlation.4Two did not use a statistically appropriate method for data analysis.

3.3. Assessment of SA

The article sought a clear definition and recognition of a sedentary lifestyle to confirm the disturbance between SA and physical inactivity. Of the 40 articles selected, 32 studies examined SA during office and computer work. Three articles assessed SA during a sit-stand work environment. The SA was assessed in the remaining five studies: one during teaching, two during hospital work, and two under mixed working conditions. SA of subjects in most of the studies are measured using questionnaires, visual observation, and videotaped, and apart from those, very few studies used accelerometers. Studies that estimated SA using questionnaires cannot conclude the proper estimation since the studies that used accelerometers showed an exclusive and objective estimation.

3.4. Assessment of Shoulder and Neck Disorders

Two articles examined SP, eleven studies investigated NP, and twelve examined shoulder- and neck-related disorders. The remaining studies only measured upper extremity disorders. Most of these studies used self-declared surveys to evaluate NSP, and the remaining studies used interviewing. In general, very few articles have focused on assessing neck/shoulder disorders using practical methods.

3.5. Evidence of an Association between SA and Neck Disorders

The majority of the employees work in an office setup, and almost all tasks are performed in a sedentary posture [4]. A desk, a chair, a computer (monitor, keyboard, and mouse), and sit-stand tables are included in the workstation. In this scenario, the association between SA and neck disorders was evaluated [10, 59].

Seven studies addressed the association between SA and neck disorders in the working population. In the working population, Kocur et al. found that forward head posture (FHP) had no significant influence on muscle stiffness, tone, and elasticity, nor did it increase the pressure sensitivity of superficial neck muscles in healthy, moderately symptomatic workers during the trial [32, 35, 60]. However, Petit et al. observed that intense physical work, awkward postures, substandard organizational ambiance, and age are risk factors for NP. The intrinsic risk factors of office workers often will have direct and indirect (intervene with the risk factors associated with the work environment) impact on the emergence of NP [8]. Moreover, Ehsani et al. revealed that long working hours in computers and prolonged sitting and standing were work-related factors that correlated with the occurrence of NP in office workers. Office workers with NP have a poor standard of living and constraints in performing their activities, for example, sleeping, indoor and outdoor activities, carrying heavy objects, doing social activities, and driving [39, 52, 61]. Overall, these findings demonstrate little evidence of the relationship between SA and NP in working populations. All reviewed studies highlighted the association and indicated the severity of work-related disorders in the neck.

3.6. Evidence of an Association between SA and Shoulder Disorders

Of the 10 studies, eight explored the effect of SA on shoulder disorders in the working population, while one study examined schoolchildren. Shariat et al.’s research focused solely on gender-based shoulder problems in the same workplace and found a positive correlation between pain severity in gender and both sides of the shoulder. The total pain score in the shoulders was revealed to be considerably associated with age [37]. According to Ng et al., the shoulder muscles contracted mildly to moderately during sedentary tasks. A significant difference in muscle activity was found in the head leaning and shoulder shrugging postures, but no demographic differences between male and female participants were found [3, 7, 55]. Zhu et al. researched the importance of positioning the forearm while typing and recommended that computer workers benefit by employing articulating armrests and frequent breaks. In circumstances where the forearm support cannot be placed at resting elbow height due to physical interference between workstation components or restricted desk adjustment, working in a floating arm posture may be preferable to working with forearms supported at an elevated height [53, 62]. In summary, there was conflicting evidence regarding the link between SA and shoulder problems in the working population due to discordant conclusions in various high-quality research.

4. Discussion

The findings of 40 studies on the association between SA and NSP were analyzed. Limited research and study heterogeneity showed little evidence of a link between SA and neck disorder in the working population, which led to these conclusions. In contrast, conflicting evidence was found for the association between SA and SP in the working population.

4.1. Summary of Main Results

People who work in the office are more likely to develop MSDs since they mainly include sedentary tasks for long periods. One example is the banking industry, where studies show that the prevalence of MSDs among bank employees ranges from 60% to 80%, indicating that they are particularly vulnerable to these injuries. The findings revealed that excessive periods of sitting among office workers could contribute to fatigue symptoms of MSD in various regions of the body, particularly in the upper extremities, neck, shoulders, and lower back. Fourteen studies (40% of all studies considered) showed that participants worked an average of 6.29 hours during an 8-hour work shift in a sitting position where females have been shown to sit longer than males (6.47 vs. 6.07 hours/day, respectively) [2, 37, 63]. For office workers, the prevalence of MSD in the shoulder and cervical spine has been reported to range from 40 to 80%. This high prevalence of MSD in workers may be due to uncomfortable and rigid postures and repeated motions in various parts of their bodies [57]. MSD is associated with both physical and mental aspects in office workers who spend significantly on computers.

Usually, due to a lack of time to engage in physical activity, office workers frequently suffer from MSD, particularly NSP. Some studies have shown that taking short breaks and walking during work reduces pain, and others reported that stretching exercises for 6–8 weeks pose benefits in reducing pain [53]. The basic principle underlying the benefits of stretching exercises, particularly for muscles, is that muscle tightness occurs due to a lack of physical activity [61, 64]. Previous research employed general flexibility exercises, but there was no evidence that these exercises reduce NSP in office workers. However, few studies have shown that thermotherapy and manual therapy can help reduce muscle soreness in office workers [31]. Still, there is currently no package of exercises designed specifically for flexibility and strength training for office workers.

4.1.1. Assessment of SA

Studies suggest that SA increases all causes of mortality; doubles the probability of coronary disease, diabetes, and obesity; and increases the risk of bowel cancer, high blood pressure, osteoporosis, lipid disorders, depression, and anxiety. About 60 to 85% of people in the world adopt sedentary lives, making it one of the most serious, yet unrecognized, public health challenges of our day. Almost two-thirds of children are projected to be inadequately involved, with significant consequences for their potential well-being. Sitting time and increased muscle tension at work are associated with pain in the HSN, leading to an unfavorable work environment. When the neck and shoulder muscles are “overstrained,” the effect may be a sore spine, numb arm, and cold hands due to decreased blood supply or a mixture of these [34].

4.1.2. Association between SA and Neck Disorders

Studies were conducted to analyze the association of SA with neck disorders. Interestingly, it was observed that there was limited evidence. The most common factors that increase the risk of developing NP among office workers are working hours on the computer, prolonged sitting, and forward flexion posture during work [39].

Workers are more likely to engage in physical labor, adopt awkward working postures, and live a sedentary lifestyle, whereas adolescents are less likely to engage in such activities. Paired with a sedentary lifestyle, adopting uncomfortable work postures for an extended period has been linked to NP. Therefore, increasing the level of physical activity among workers sought to prevent NP. Some studies evaluated the most common neck disorders and reported that computer workers with NP had a higher prevalence of TMD. Furthermore, the intensity of pain in response to cervical muscle palpation was significantly higher, and the pressure pain threshold of craniocervical was significantly lower among computer workers.

Additionally, this study emphasized the necessity of considering the work conditions of patients with TMD, as neck disability in computer workers is explained by the correlations between NP, TMD, and unfavorable work conditions [16, 35, 46]. Some studies suggest equipment such as a wearable sensor can help diagnose NP; participants had 8% lower neck flexion postures at sitting and standing workstations. Compared to the sitting workplace, the effect of the wearable sensor on the neck was more significant in the standing workstation [13, 65].

Many studies reported contradictory results on gender-specific effects on the neck among the working population. Women have a higher incidence of NP in the workplace than men, due to their diminutive stature and lower muscle strength. Furthermore, the “gender effect” on the results could be explained by different work activities (intensity, frequency, and type of exposure) [8]. Therefore, future studies could focus on a specific study population by considering the type of work and its impact on physical activity.

4.1.3. Association between SA and Shoulder Disorders

The body of evidence regarding the relationship between SA and SP is more inconsistent than the relationship between NP and SA. In light of some studies, SP acquisition is undoubtedly due to working with arms above the shoulder level and other unbalanced positions, such as flexion of the front trunk, severe vibrations of the arm, pressing, and pulling the load. Moreover, other risk factors, such as physical discomfort situations, cuts, bending, working with arms raised to a support level, overloading, and handling heavy loads, can cause problems in the upper appendix, especially the shoulder problem [42, 55, 66]. In addition, computer and typography workers will generally work in a particular position. Unfortunately, working in a specific position with an unusual shoulder strap would put more weight on the shoulder and neck joints. Typically, SP, such as RCD, shoulder tendonitis, and NP affect sedentary workers.

The rotator cuff wears occur from repetitive behavior, putting tremendous strain on the rotator cuff tendons and the entire shoulder joint. Strains vary, from small, partial tears to massive, full, thick tears. Medical treatment for these tears would depend on the extent of the tear, the symptoms experienced by the injured worker, and the injured worker’s age. Another type of workplace accident that occurs frequently is an abrupt traumatic injury, which can occur due to slipping and falling or being struck by a large object. Slips and falls frequently occur in the winter months or in warehouse-type facilities with cardboard, paper, and other packing items on the warehouse floor [47]. They usually occur when an arm is extended to break a fall or when the injured worker lands directly on the shoulder. When carefully adhered to, proper working positions can minimize the chance of maintaining an activity related to a rotator cuff sprain or tear [63, 67].

4.2. Explanatory Hypothesis of Divergent Results

Five factors are considered due to contradictory results in the study.1Duration of SA: this should be controlled according to the type of work.2Daily physical activity: regular SA may be enough to affect the upper body.3Testing time: the testing time affects the results for shorter and longer time activities.4Age of the participants: the relentless stable effects will be evident in more stable individuals than younger people.5A measure of SA: the measure may affect the stable measure of the results because emotional measurements (studies) cannot think much about measuring the time spent on SA.

4.3. Recommendations

This systematic review presented the absence of studies identified as probability factors due to the sedentary lifestyle in the upper body area. Mainly, the information showed contradictory results; it is speculated at various points to evaluate the effects on the HSN. This should be possible by analyzing more factors for extended periods or interventions for specific periods (days). These studies should suggest (1) specific surveys or measures that assess the reputation, regularity, and interval of SA and (2) specific questions or estimates of the completed physical training. Moreover, few technologies could be considered for detecting, analyzing, and restricting the SA. Ergonomic training is among them; it reduces the risk of MSD and the frequency of pain, even years after training [68]. Secondly, the usage of sensors is increasing in the work environment; the wearable sensor could be an effective tool to alleviate the postural stress of the head and neck in SW [31, 50, 65, 69]. Regarding detecting neck movements, the study of the wearable system by Lo et al. showed good performance in detecting repetitive movements [70].

5. Conclusions

The evidence from this review suggests the need to focus on appropriate work situations to manage their tasks efficiently by controlling the SA, rather than asking workers for regular exercise. Health outcomes (i.e., all-cause mortality, cardiovascular disease, MSD, diabetes, and depression) were consistently effective among workers. Therefore, it is necessary to control and prevent unnecessary SA. This can be initiated by preventive wellness projects, which can suggest work adjustments, such as signaling to urge workers to wake up every 20 minutes or recommend permanent work areas or dynamic workstations. Finally, more information on the outcomes of SA in physical well-being should be available to workers [51].

Abbreviations

SA:	Sedentary activity
SW:	Sedentary work
NP:	Neck pain
SP:	Shoulder pain
NSP:	Neck and shoulder pain
HSN:	Head, shoulder, and neck
FHP:	Forward head posture
MSD:	Musculoskeletal disorder
RCD:	Rotator cuff disorders
TMD:	Temporomandibular disorder
PRISMA:	Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses
RCT:	Randomized control trail
CSS:	Cross-sectional study
CS:	Cohort study.
BMI:	Body mass index

Data Availability

The data generated and analyzed during the study are included.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania.

References

E. Sitthipornvorakul, P. Janwantanakul, N. Purepong, P. Pensri, and A. J. Van Der Beek, “The association between physical activity and neck and low back pain: a systematic review,” European Spine Journal, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 677–689, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. K. Zeverdegani, M. Yazdi, and A. H. MollaAghaBabaee, “Latent class-derived patterns of musculoskeletal disorders in sedentary workers and chair ergonomic design,” International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, vol. 15, pp. 1–6, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W.-G. Yoo and M.-H. Kim, “Effect of different seat support characteristics on the neck and trunk muscles and forward head posture of visual display terminal workers,” Work, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 3–8, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. T. ElShewy, “Calcific tendinitis of the rotator cuff,” World Journal of Orthopedics, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 55–60, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Hwang-Bo, J.-H. Lee, and H.-D. Kim, “Efficacy of kinesiology taping for recovery of dominant upper back pain in female sedentary worker having a rounded shoulder posture,” Technology and Health Care, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 607–612, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. H. Suni, M. Rinne, K. Tokola, A. Mänttäri, and T. Vasankari, “Effectiveness of a standardised exercise programme for recurrent neck and low back pain: a multicentre, randomised, two-arm, parallel group trial across 34 fitness clubs in Finland,” BMJ Open Sport & Exercise Medicine, vol. 3, no. 1, Article ID e000233, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Landau, “Occupational stress factors and musculo-skeletal disease in patients at a rehabilitation center,” Occupational Ergonomics, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 139–153, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Petit, J. Bodin, A. Delarue, A. D’Escatha, N. Fouquet, and Y. Roquelaure, “Risk factors for episodic neck pain in workers: a 5-year prospective study of a general working population,” International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, vol. 91, no. 3, pp. 251–261, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. H. Andersen, L. L. Andersen, O. S. Mortensen, M. K. Zebis, and G. Sjøgaard, “Protocol for Shoulder function training reducing musculoskeletal pain in shoulder and neck: a randomized controlled trial,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, vol. 12, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y.-L. Kuo, K.-Y. Huang, C.-Y. Kao, and Y.-J. Tsai, “Sitting posture during prolonged computer typing with and without a wearable biofeedback sensor,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 10, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. J. Devin, M. Bydon, M. A. Alvi et al., “A predictive model and nomogram for predicting return to work at 3 months after cervical spine surgery: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database,” Neurosurgical Focus, vol. 45, no. 5, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. P. Pronk, A. S. Katz, M. Lowry, and J. R. Payfer, “Reducing occupational sitting time and improving worker health: the Take-a-Stand Project, 2011,” Preventing Chronic Disease, vol. 9, p. E154, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Daneshmandi, A. Choobineh, H. Ghaem, and M. Karimi, “Adverse effects of prolonged sitting behavior on the general health of office workers,” J. lifestyle Med., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 69–75, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Babski-Reeves and A. Calhoun, “Muscle activity and posture differences in the sit and stand phases of sit-to-stand workstation use: a comparison of computer configurations,” IISE Trans. Occup. Ergon. Hum. FACTORS, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 236–246, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Sundstrup, M. D. Jakobsen, K. Jay, M. Brandt, and L. L. Andersen, “High intensity physical exercise and pain in the neck and upper limb among slaughterhouse workers: cross-sectional study,” BioMed Research International, vol. 2014, Article ID 218546, 5 pages, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. M. Bragatto, D. Bevilaqua-Grossi, S. C. H. Regalo, J. D. Sousa, and T. C. Chaves, “Associations among temporomandibular disorders, chronic neck pain and neck pain disability in computer office workers: a pilot study,” Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 321–332, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Sitthipornvorakul, P. Janwantanakul, and V. Lohsoonthorn, “The effect of daily walking steps on preventing neck and low back pain in sedentary workers: a 1-year prospective cohort study,” Eur. spine J. Off. Publ. Eur. Spine Soc. Eur. Spinal Deform. Soc. Eur. Sect. Cerv. Spine Res. Soc., vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 417–424, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Kanniappan and J. Selvakumar, “Prevalence of work related psychological and musculoskeletal problems among business process outsourcing workers,” J. Lifestyle Med., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 55–60, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. M. Straker, A. J. Smitha, N. Bear, P. B. O’Sullivan, and N. H. de Klerk, “Neck/shoulder pain, habitual spinal posture and computer use in adolescents: the importance of gender,” Ergonomics, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 539–546, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. J. Page, J. E. McKenzie, P. M. Bossuyt et al., “The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews,” BMJ, vol. 372, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. P. Parry, P. Coenen, N. Shrestha, P. B. O’Sullivan, C. G. Maher, and L. M. Straker, “Workplace interventions for increasing standing or walking for decreasing musculoskeletal symptoms in sedentary workers,” Cochrane Database Syst. Rev., vol. 2019, no. 11, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. E. Rhodes, R. S. Mark, and C. P. Temmel, “Adult sedentary behavior: a systematic review,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. e3–e28, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. De Baets, R. van der Straaten, T. Matheve, and A. Timmermans, “Shoulder assessment according to the international classification of functioning by means of inertial sensor technologies: a systematic review,” Gait & Posture, vol. 57, pp. 278–294, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Ma, D. Ma, Z. Li, and H. Kim, “Effects of a workplace sit-stand desk intervention on health and productivity,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 21, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. M. Aegerter, M. Deforth, V. Johnston et al., “On-site multi-component intervention to improve productivity and reduce the economic and personal burden of neck pain in Swiss office-workers (NEXpro): protocol for a cluster-randomized controlled trial,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, vol. 21, no. 1, p. 391, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. F. Barbieri, D. Srinivasan, S. E. Mathiassen, and A. B. Oliveira, “Variation in upper extremity, neck and trunk postures when performing computer work at a sit-stand station,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 75, pp. 120–128, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Daneshmandi, A. Choobineh, H. Ghaem, and N. Hejazi, “Proper sit–stand work schedule to reduce the negative outcomes of sedentary behavior: a randomized clinical trial,” International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, vol. 27, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. H. Temesgen, G. J. Belay, A. Y. Gelaw, B. Janakiraman, and Y. Animut, “Burden of shoulder and/neck pain among school teachers in Ethiopia,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–9, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Kocur, M. Wilski, M. Goliwąs, J. Lewandowski, and D. Łochyński, “Influence of forward head posture on myotonometric measurements of superficial neck muscle tone, elasticity, and stiffness in asymptomatic individuals with sedentary jobs,” J Manipulative Physiol Ther, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 195–202, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. C. R. Fonseca, F. P. F. Ricci, L. M. Gil et al., “Musculoskeletal complaints in a sample of employees in a tertiary hospital: an exploratory preliminary pilot study,” Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 820, pp. 255–260, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. C. Ailneni, K. R. Syamala, I.-S. I. S. I.-S. S. Kim, and J. Hwang, “Influence of the wearable posture correction sensor on head and neck posture: sitting and standing workstations,” Work, vol. 62, no. 1, pp. 27–35, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. L. Brakenridge, Y. Y. Chong, E. A. H. Winkler et al., “Evaluating short-term musculoskeletal pain changes in desk-based workers receiving a workplace sitting-reduction intervention,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 15, no. 9, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. O. Gras, O. I. Ali, S. S. RezkAllah, M. H. Abdelsattar, and H. M. Elhafez, “Inter-relationships between cervical angles, muscle activity levels and mechanical neck pain,” Journal of Medical Science, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 11–19, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Shariat, J. R. Cardoso, J. A. Cleland et al., “Prevalence rate of neck, shoulder and lower back pain in association with age, body mass index and gender among Malaysian office workers,” Work, vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 191–199, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J.-G. Bau, T. Chia, S.-H. Wei, Y.-H. Li, and F.-C. Kuo, “Correlations of neck/shoulder perfusion characteristics and pain symptoms of the female office workers with sedentary lifestyle,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 1, Article ID e0169318, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Ehsani, Z. Mosallanezhad, and G. Vahedi, “The prevalence, risk factors and consequences of neck pain in office employees,” Middle East J. Rehabil. Heal., vol. 4, 2 pages, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Du, Q. Wang, L. de Baets, and P. Markopoulos, “Supporting shoulder pain prevention and treatment with wearable technology,” in Proceedings of the PervasiveHealth: Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare, pp. 235–243, Barcelona, Spain. New York, NY, USA, May 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. K. Howie, P. Coenen, A. C. Campbell, S. Ranelli, and L. M. Straker, “Head, trunk and arm posture amplitude and variation, muscle activity, sedentariness and physical activity of 3 to 5 year-old children during tablet computer use compared to television watching and toy play,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 65, pp. 41–50, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. M. Hallman, M. Birk Jørgensen, and A. Holtermann, “Objectively measured physical activity and 12-month trajectories of neck-shoulder pain in workers: a prospective study in DPHACTO,” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 288–298, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Palmlöf, L. W. Holm, L. Alfredsson, C. Magnusson, E. Vingård, and E. Skillgate, “The impact of work related physical activity and leisure physical activity on the risk and prognosis of neck pain - a population based cohort study on workers,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, vol. 17, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Baydur, A. Ergör, Y. Demiral, and E. Akalin, “Effects of participatory ergonomic intervention on the development of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders and disability in office employees using a computer,” Journal of Occupational Health, vol. 58, no. 3, pp. 297–309, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Ardahan and H. Simsek, “Analyzing musculoskeletal system discomforts and risk factors in computer-using office workers,” Pakistan J. Med. Sci., vol. 32, no. 6, pp. 1425–1429, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Machado-Matos and P. M. Arezes, “Impact of a workplace exercise program on neck and shoulder segments in office workers,” Dyna, vol. 83, no. 196, pp. 63–68, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. M. Hallman, N. Gupta, M. Heiden et al., “Is prolonged sitting at work associated with the time course of neck-shoulder pain? A prospective study in Danish blue-collar workers,” BMJ Open, vol. 6, no. 11, Article ID e012689, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Gao, N. Nevala, N. J. Cronin, and T. Finni, “Effects of environmental intervention on sedentary time, musculoskeletal comfort and work ability in office workers,” European Journal of Sport Science, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 747–754, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. D. Collins and L. W. O’Sullivan, “Musculoskeletal disorder prevalence and psychosocial risk exposures by age and gender in a cohort of office based employees in two academic institutions,” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 46, pp. 85–97, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Tunwattanapong, R. Kongkasuwan, and V. Kuptniratsaikul, “The effectiveness of a neck and shoulder stretching exercise program among office workers with neck pain: a randomized controlled trial,” Clinical Rehabilitation, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 64–72, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Brink, Q. Louw, K. Grimmer, and E. Jordaan, “The relationship between sitting posture and seated-related upper quadrant musculoskeletal pain in computing South African adolescents: a prospective study,” Manual Therapy, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 820–826, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Petit, C. Ha, J. Bodin et al., “Personal, biomechanical, organizational and psychosocial risk factors for neck disorders in a working population,” Journal of Occupational Health, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 134–140, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. G. Davis and S. E. Kotowski, “Postural variability: an effective way to reduce musculoskeletal discomfort in office work,” Human Factors, vol. 56, no. 7, pp. 1249–1261, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Ng, C. McNee, J. Kieser, and M. Farella, “Neck and shoulder muscle activity during standardized work-related postural tasks,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 556–563, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Lövgren, P. Gustavsson, B. Melin, and A. Rudman, “Neck/shoulder and back pain in new graduate nurses: a growth mixture modeling analysis,” International Journal of Nursing Studies, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 625–639, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Matre and S. Knardahl, “‘Central sensitization’ in chronic neck/shoulder pain,” Scand. J. pain, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 230–235, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zhu and G. Shin, “Shoulder and neck muscle activities during typing with articulating forearm support at different heights,” Ergonomics, vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1412–1419, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Black, L. Des Roches, and I. Arsenault, “Observed postural variations across computer workers during a day of sedentary computer work,” Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc., vol. 56, no. 1, pp. 1119–1122, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. G. Yoo, S. Y. Park, and M. R. Lee, “Relationship between active cervical range of motion and flexion-relaxation ratio in asymptomatic computer workers,” Journal of Physiological Anthropology, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 203–207, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. L. R. Reliquias and J. C. Kuebler, “The behavior of pain in response to sit-stand workstations: a systematic review,” Physical Therapy Reviews, vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 223–228, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Domeika, I. Aleknaitė-Dambrauskienė, V. Grigas, K. Kazlauskienė, V. Saučiūnaitė, and G. Krutulytė, “The effect of prolonged sitting on different unstable chairs on trunk muscles activity and posture for individuals with sedentary work,” in Proceedings of the International Conference BIOMDLORE, Bialystok, Poland, June 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. H. Weon, J. S. Oh, H. S. Cynn, Y. W. Kim, O. Y. Kwon, and C. H. Yi, “Influence of forward head posture on scapular upward rotators during isometric shoulder flexion,” Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 367–374, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. G. Silva and M. I. Johnson, “Does forward head posture affect postural control in human healthy volunteers?” Gait & Posture, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 352-353, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Dankel, M. B. Jessee, T. Abe, and J. P. Loenneke, “The effects of blood flow restriction on upper-body musculature located distal and proximal to applied pressure,” Sports Medicine, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 23–33, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. A. Kennedy, B. C. Amick, J. T. Dennerlein et al., “Systematic review of the role of occupational health and safety interventions in the prevention of upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms, signs, disorders, injuries, claims and lost time,” Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 127–162, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
O. Tikkanen, P. Haakana, A. J. Pesola et al., “Muscle activity and inactivity periods during normal daily life,” PLoS One, vol. 8, no. 1, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D.-J. Park and S.-Y. Park, “Long-term effects of diagonal active stretching versus static stretching for cervical neuromuscular dysfunction, disability and pain: an 8 weeks follow-up study,” Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 403–410, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. E. Solstad, V. Andersen, M. Shaw, E. M. Hoel, A. Vonheim, and A. H. Saeterbakken, “A comparison of muscle activation between barbell bench press and dumbbell flyes in resistance-trained males,” Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 645–651, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
U. G. Longo, L. R. Ambrogioni, A. Berton et al., “Physical therapy and precision rehabilitation in shoulder rotator cuff disease,” International Orthopaedics, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 893–903, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Ekinci, S. Atasavun Uysal, V. Y. Kabak, and T. Duger, “Does ergonomics training have an effect on body posture during computer usage?” Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 191–195, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. K. R. Guduru, A. Domeika, M. Dubosiene, and K. Kazlauskiene, “Prediction framework for upper body sedentary working behaviour by using deep learning and machine learning techniques,” Soft Computing, vol. 8, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Lo Presti, A. Carnevale, J. D’Abbraccio et al., “A multi-parametric wearable system to monitor neck movements and respiratory frequency of computer workers,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 2, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. M. Van Niekerk, S. M. Fourie, and Q. A. Louw, “Postural dynamism during computer mouse and keyboard use: a pilot study,” Applied Ergonomics, vol. 50, pp. 170–176, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Rama Krishna Reddy Guduru et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

1500

Downloads

983

Citations