Curtin University Homepage
  • Library
  • Help
    • Admin

    espace - Curtin’s institutional repository

    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item
    • espace Home
    • espace
    • Curtin Research Publications
    • View Item

    Detailed assessment of low-back loads may not be worth the effort: Acomparison of two methods for exposure-outcome assessment of low-back pain

    Access Status
    Fulltext not available
    Authors
    Coenen, Pieter
    Kingma, I.
    Boot, C.
    Bongers, P.
    van Dieën, J.
    Date
    2015
    Type
    Journal Article
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Coenen, P. and Kingma, I. and Boot, C. and Bongers, P. and van Dieën, J. 2015. Detailed assessment of low-back loads may not be worth the effort: Acomparison of two methods for exposure-outcome assessment of low-back pain. Applied Ergonomics. 51: pp. 322-330.
    Source Title
    Applied Ergonomics
    DOI
    10.1016/j.apergo.2015.06.005
    ISSN
    0003-6870
    School
    School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/47034
    Collection
    • Curtin Research Publications
    Abstract

    The trade-off between feasibility and accuracy of measurements of physical exposure at the workplace has often been discussed, but is unsufficiently understood. We therefore explored the effect of two low-back loading measurement tools with different accuracies on exposure estimates and their associations with low-back pain (LBP).Low-back moments of 93 workers were obtained using two methods: a moderately accurate observation-based method and a relatively more accurate video-analysis method. Group-based exposure metrics were assigned to a total of 1131 workers who reported on their LBP status during three follow-up years. The two methods were compared regarding individual and group-based moments and their predictive value for LBP.Differences between the two methods for peak moments were high at the individual level and remained substantial at group level. For cumulative moments, differences between the two methods were attenuated as random inaccuracies cancelled out. Peak moments were not predictive for LBP in any method while cumulative moments were, suggesting comparable predictive values of the two methods. While assessment of low-back load improves from investing in collecting relatively more accurate individual-based data, this does not necessarily lead to better predictive values on a group level, especially not for cumulative loads.

    Related items

    Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.

    • Cumulative mechanical low-back load at work is a determinant of low-back pain
      Coenen, Pieter; Kingma, I.; Boot, C.; Bongers, P.; Van Dieën, J. (2014)
      Objectives: Reported associations of physical exposures during work (eg, lifting, trunk flexion or rotation) and low-back pain (LBP) are rather inconsistent. Mechanical back loads (eg, moments on the low back) as a result ...
    • The contribution of load magnitude and number of load cycles to cumulative low-back load estimations: A study based on in-vitro compression data
      Coenen, Pieter; Kingma, I.; Boot, C.; Bongers, P.; Van Dieën, J. (2012)
      Background: Cumulative low-back load is suggested to be associated with low back pain, possibly due to (micro-)fractures of spinal segments. Based on available in vitro data it can be assumed that, in order to predict ...
    • Inter-rater reliability of a video-analysis method measuring low-back load inafield situation
      Coenen, Pieter; Kingma, I.; Boot, C.; Bongers, P.; Van Dieën, J. (2013)
      Valid and reliable low-back load assessment tools that can be used in field situations are needed for epidemiologic studies and for ergonomic practice. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of a ...
    Advanced search

    Browse

    Communities & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument TypeThis CollectionIssue DateAuthorTitleSubjectDocument Type

    My Account

    Admin

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Follow Curtin

    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 
    • 

    CRICOS Provider Code: 00301JABN: 99 143 842 569TEQSA: PRV12158

    Copyright | Disclaimer | Privacy statement | Accessibility

    Curtin would like to pay respect to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members of our community by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land on which the Perth campus is located, the Whadjuk people of the Nyungar Nation; and on our Kalgoorlie campus, the Wongutha people of the North-Eastern Goldfields.