Abstract
Study Design
Cohort study.
Objective
To measure the prevalence and incidence of work absenteeism involving neck pain in a cohort of claimants to the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB).
Summary of Background Data
According to workers’ compensation statistics, neck pain accounts for a small proportion of lost-time claims. However, these statistics may be biased by an underenumeration of claimants with neck disorders.
Methods
We studied all lost-time claimants to the Ontario WSIB in 1998 and used 2 methods to enumerate neck pain cases. We report the prevalence and incidence of neck pain using 2 denominators: (1) annual number of lost-time claimants and (2) an estimate of the Ontario working population covered by the WSIB.
Results
The estimated percentage of lost-time claimants with neck pain ranged from 2.8% (95% CI 2.5–3.3) using only codes specific for neck pain to 11.3% (95% CI 9.5–13.1) using a weighted estimate of codes capturing neck pain cases. The health care sector had the highest percentage of claims with neck pain. The annual incidence of neck pain among the Ontario working population ranged from 6 per 10,000 full-time equivalents (FTE) (95% CI 5–6) to 23 per 10,000 FTE (95% CI 20–27) depending on the codes used to capture neck pain. Male workers between the ages of 20 and 39 years were the most likely to experience an episode of work absenteeism involving neck pain.
Conclusion
Neck pain is a common and burdensome problem for Ontario workers. Our study highlights the importance of properly capturing all neck pain cases when describing its prevalence and incidence.
Keywords: neck pain, work, sick leave, epidemiology, prevalence, incidence, workers’ compensation
Footnotes
Supported by a grant of The Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care (Special Chiropractic Research Fund), Canadian Institute of Health Research (to P.C., D.B., and V.K.), and Canadian Institute for the Relief of Pain and Disability’s (formerly the Physical Medicine Research Foundation) Woodbridge Grants and Awards Program (to V.K.).
The manuscript submitted does not contain information about medical device(s)/drug(s).
Institutional funds were received in support of this work. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.
Ethics Board Approval number: University of Toronto (Protocol Reference: 00011747).
Reprinted with permission from Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Côté P, Kristman V, Vidmar M, et al., The Prevalence and Incidence of Work Absenteeism Involving Neck Pain, A Cohort of Ontario Lost-Time Claimants, SPINE, Volume 33, Number 4S, pp S192–S198
References
- 1.Côté P, van der Velde G, Cassidy JD, et al. The burden and determinants of neck pain in workers. Results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and its Associated Disorders. Spine 2008;33(Suppl):S60–S74. [DOI] [PubMed]
- 2.Palmer KT, Walker-Bone K, Griffin MJ, et al (2001) Prevalence and occupational associations of neck pain in the British population. Scand J Work Environ Health 27:49–56 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 3.Leroux I, Dionne CE, Bourbonnais R, et al (2005) Prevalence of musculoskeletal pain and associated factors in the Quebec working population. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 78:379–86 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 4.Saskatchewan Workers’ Compensation Board. Statistical Supplement 2003. [Saskatchewan Workers’ Compensation Board.]. 2003. Available at: http://www.wcbsask.com/WCBPortal/ShowProperty/WCBRepository/formsPublications/publications/annualPubs/2005StatisticalSummary//pdfContent.
- 5.Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB). [Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (WSIB)]. 2005. Available at:http://www.wsib.on.ca/wsib/wsibobj.nsf/LookupFiles/DownloadableFile2005StatisticalSupplement/$File/2278A_StatSup.pdf.
- 6.Silverstein B, Viikari-Juntura E, Kalat J (2002) Use of a prevention index to identify industries at high risk for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, back, and upper extremity in Washington state, 1990–1998. Am J Ind Med 41:149–69 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 7.Azaroff LS, Levenstein C, Wegman DH (2002) Occupational injury and illness surveillance: conceptual filters explain underreporting. Am J Public Health 92:1421–9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 8.Beaton DE. Examining the clinical course of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper extremity using the Ontario Workers’ Compensation Board administrative database, Thesis, University of Toronto, Toronto, 1995.
- 9.Zakaria D, Mustard C, Robertson J, et al (2003) Identifying cumulative trauma disorders of the upper extremity in workers’ compensation databases. Am J Ind Med 43:507–18 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 10.Van Eerd D, Côté P, Beaton D, et al (2006) Capturing cases in workers’ compensation databases: the example of neck pain. Am J Ind Med 49:557– 68 [DOI] [PubMed]
- 11.Workplace Safety and Insurance Act. Government of Ontario; 1997.
- 12.Deleted in proof.
- 13.Bogduk N. Innervation and Pain Patterns of the Cervical Spine. Physical Therapy of the Cervical and Thoracic Spine. 3rd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2002:1–13.
- 14.Spitzer WO, Skovron ML, Salmi LR, et al. Scientific monograph of the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders: redefining “whiplash” and its management. Spine 1995; 20:1S–73S [PubMed]
- 15.Association of Worker’s Compensation Boards of Canada. National Work Injury/Disease and Fatality Statistics Program. Coder Reference Manual: Coding guidelines, issues and cases Version 2. [Association of Worker’s Compensation Boards of Canada.]. 1999;2.
- 16.Minister of Industry. Statistics Canada Guide to the Labour Force Survey. 71-543-GIE. 2003. Ottawa. Ref Type: Report.
- 17.Smith PM, Mustard CA, Payne JI (2004) Methods for estimating the labour force insured by the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board: 1990–2000. Chronic Dis Can 25:127–37 [PubMed]
- 18.SAS/STAT User’s Guide, Version 6. 4th ed. SAS Institute; 1990.