Wang et al. 2008
[17]
|
USA
|
RCT
|
293 (subset of operators with Rempel 2007 with lower p) Group n= (111;84;98)
|
Sewing machine operators with back /hip pain
|
Gp 1: control
|
Pre and post monthly for 4/12: Pain symptoms- intensity (1-5) and frequency
|
Mean pain Improv’t gp 2 vs 1: 0.25(95%CI: 0.16, 0.34);GP3 vs 1: 0.43 (0.34-0.51) per month.
|
Adjustable, swivelling chairs offer advantage (reduction in LB/Hip pain) for workers in seated/UL occupations; flat pan superior to curved?
|
Obtain means and sd for pain scores for each group (presented graphically in Fig 5A) at 4/12f/u
|
Gp2: curved pan chair
|
Gp 3: flat seat pan chair (all received misc items, chairs hgt adjustable)
|
Remple et al. 2008
[19]
|
USA
|
RCT
|
277 (subset with upper p) Group n pain (105;72;100)
|
Sewing machine operators with neck/ shoulder pain
|
Gp 1: control Gp2: curved pan chair Gp 3: flat seat pan chair (all received miscel items; intervention chairs hgt adjustable)
|
Pre and post monthly for 4/12: Pain symptoms- intensity (1-5) and frequency
|
Mean pain Improv’t gp 2 vs 1: 0.34 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.41); GP3 vs 1: 0.14 (.07-.022) per month.
|
Adjustable, swivelling chairs offer advantage (reduction in Cx/shoulder pain) for workers in seated/ UL occupations; curved pan superior to flat?
|
Obtain means and sd for pain scores for each group (presented graphically in Fig 5A) at 4/12f/u
|
Amick et al. 2003
[4]
|
USA
|
RCT (assigned according to office location)
|
192(87;52;S3)
|
Office workers (>4hrs per day at computer;>6 hrs per day sitting)
|
Gp1: adjustable chair + training
|
Pre (2xmonthly) and post intervention (3x over 1 year). Musculo- skeletal symptoms-1. Growth over workday 2. Average pain over workday
|
Symptom growth over workday: Gp 1<gp2/3 at 12/12f/u (p=0.012). Ave pain levels: Reduced for both Gp 1+2 compared to Gp3
|
Highly adjustable chairs plus training resulted in less end of day pain and reduced average pain (largest reduction in neck/shoulder, followed by upper and lower back)
|
Cant separate chair as sole intervention but clear that chair + info is superior to info alone or nothing.
|
Gp2: training only
|
Gp3: no intervention
|
Herbert et al. 2001 [20
|
USA
|
Pre and post test
|
36
|
Garment workers (“spooling” task), female
|
Adjustable chairs and training in their use
|
MS symptom survey prior to and 6/12 after introduction. Joint position in sitting via video (subgroup only). Upper limbs only.
|
Baseline pain report89% of group; post 63.9% (p=0.007); Reduction in severity at 10/11 anatomic sites after intervention. Only modest declines in awkward posture (small n)
|
Reduction in people with pain and reduction in severity overall at upper limb anatomical sites. Inconclusive posture change findings.
|
|
Gadge et al. 2007
[18] |
Australia |
Sungle case, multiple baseline (ABAB) |
4 |
University students (sitting “most of the time”) |
Standard office chair (adjustable) vs “saddle” seat |
(dis) Comfort (VAS); Production (typing task speed and accuracy); Posture (videotape) Multiple measures across 4 phases. |
Discomfort in lower back increased over time in both chairs but less so in the saddle; discomfort was significantly worse in lower limbs in saddle chair; Productivity no change; Greater trunk to thigh angles in saddle. |
Some benefits for lower back discomfort and posture in saddle but also issues (lower limb discomfort). |
|