Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2023 Dec 17;230(6):583–599.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2023.12.014

TABLE 2.

Occupational lifting and back and/or pelvic girdle pain during pregnancy

Author, Year Design Overall Exposure Assessment Lifting Exposure Effect Effect Size Outcome

Utility Frequency Timing Reference Categories Measure (95% CI)

Caputo, 202136 Cross-sectional ++ 1 Retrospective (at delivery) Never have to lift heavy items Heavy lifting LBP during pregnancy (0, 1)
Rarely Sometimes Often Always Adj OR 0.83 (0.54, 1.27)
1.20 (0.93, 1.55)
1.37 (0.94, 2.00)
1.39 (1.01, 1.93)
Heavy lifting LBP severity during pregnancy (0–10, no pain to highest pain)
Rarely Sometimes Often Always Adj MD 0.53 (−0.25, 1.31)
−0.19 (−0.63, 0.25)
0.81 (0.18, 1.44)
0.92 (0.39, 1.44)

Larsen, 201326 Prospective cohort +++ 1 12–16 GW Not defined; assumed no lifting and lifting ≤10 kg Heavy lifting Functionally limiting PGP during pregnancy (0, 1)
Any >11 kg
Cumulativea
15–100 kg
101–200 kg
201–500 kg
501–1k kg
>1000 kg
Adj OR

Adj OR
1.18 (1.12–1.25)

1.06 (0.99, 1.13)
1.21 (1.09, 1.34)
1.45 (1.31, 1.60)
1.45 (1.23, 1.72)
1.31 (1.02, 1.69)

Juhl, 200535 Case-control + 1 12–16 GW Reported ‘no,’ but assumed ≤10 kg Heavy lifting Functionally limiting PGP during pregnancy (0, 1)
11–20 kg
>20 kg
Adj OR 1.12 (0.88, 1.44)
1.14 (0.86, 1.50)

Larsen, 199930 Prospective cohort + 1 16 GW Not defined; assumed no lifting and lifting ≤10 kg >10 kg cOR

Adj P value
1.90 (1.41, 2.56)b

NS
Functionally limiting PGP during pregnancy (0, 1)

Endresen, 199538 Cross-sectional + 1 Retrospective (at delivery) Not defined; assumed no lifting and lifting <10 kg Frequent lifting 10–20 kg Adj β 0.060 (2.18)c LBP/PGP during pregnancy (0, 1)

Adj, adjusted; CI, confidence interval; cOR, crude odds ratio; GW, gestational weeks; JEM, Job Exposure Matrix; kg, kilograms; LBP, low back pain; LBP/PGP, low back and pelvic girdle pain combined; MD, mean difference; NS, not statistically significant; OR, odds ratio; PGP, pelvic girdle pain; (0, 1), binary outcome (no, yes).

a

For self-reported cumulative total lifting per day, a positive exposure-response relationship was observed (P-value for trend <0.0001). For JEM-derived cumulative total lifting per day, an exposure-response relationship was not observed (P-value for trend <0.0918);

b

Effect size and 95% CI was computed from the proportion of exposed participants with and without pelvic girdle relaxation (Table 1);36

c

Numeric value reported in parentheses, t (significance test).