open access publication

Article, 2024

Occupational psychosocial exposures and chronic low-back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, ISSN 1795-990X, 0355-3140, Volume 50, 5, Pages 329-340, 10.5271/sjweh.4165

Contributors

Jahn, Alexander 0000-0002-6806-0371 (Corresponding author) [1] Andersen, Johan Hviid 0000-0003-1638-8276 [2] [3] Seidler, Andreas 0000-0002-8107-8971 [4] Christiansen, David Høyrup 0000-0001-7458-3921 [3] [5] [6] Dalbøge, Annett 0000-0001-8657-1688 [1] [3]

Affiliations

  1. [1] Aarhus University Hospital
  2. [NORA names: Central Denmark Region; Hospital; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  3. [2] Danish Ramazzini Center
  4. [NORA names: Other Hospitals; Hospital; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  5. [3] Aarhus University
  6. [NORA names: AU Aarhus University; University; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
  7. [4] TU Dresden
  8. [NORA names: Germany; Europe, EU; OECD];
  9. [5] Elective Surgery Centre, Silkeborg Regional Hospital, Silkeborg, Denmark, .
  10. [NORA names: Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore the association between occupational psychosocial exposures and chronic low-back pain (LBP) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: The research protocol was registered in PROSPERO. A systematic literature search was performed in six databases, identifying articles complying with predefined inclusion criteria. In our PECOS, we defined outcome as chronic LBP ≥3 months, exposures as occupational psychosocial exposures, and restricted study design to case-control and cohort studies. Two authors independently excluded articles, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and graded evidence levels. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. RESULTS: The 20 included articles encompassed six different occupational psychosocial exposures (job control, demand, strain, support, stress, and satisfaction), only 1 had low risk of bias. For all occupational psychosocial exposures, odds ratios ranged from 0.8 to 1.1. Sensitivity analyses based on risk of bias was conducted for two outcomes ie, job control and job demand, finding no differences between high and low-to-moderate risk of bias studies. Using GRADE, we found a very low level of evidence of the association for all occupational psychosocial exposures. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found no association between occupational psychosocial exposures and chronic LBP. However, it is important to underline that the level of evidence was very low. High quality studies are highly warranted.

Keywords

PROSPERO, Pecos, analysis, article, assess risk, assessed risk of bias, association, authors, bias, bias studies, case-control, chronic low back pain, cohort, cohort study, control, criteria, data, database, demand, evidence, exposure, grade, high quality studies, inclusion, inclusion criteria, job, job control, job demands, level of evidence, levels, literature search, low back pain, low risk, low risk of bias, low-to-moderate risk, meta-analyses, meta-analysis, model, months, odds, odds ratio, outcomes, pain, protocol, psychosocial exposures, quality studies, random-effects model, ratio, research, research protocol, review, risk, risk of bias, risk of bias studies, search, sensitivity, sensitivity analysis, study, systematic literature search, systematic review

Funders

  • Danish Working Environment Authority

Data Provider: Digital Science