Teleworking and Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Selection of Studies
2.2. Extracted Data
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- ILO. COVID-19: Guidance for Labour Statistics Data Collection. In Defining and Measuring Remote Work, Telework, Work at Home and Home-Based Work; International Labour Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- WHO; ILO. Healthy and Safe Telework. Available online: http://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_836250/lang--en/index.htm (accessed on 27 October 2022).
- Eurostat. Statistics. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/lfsa_ehomp/default/table?lang=en (accessed on 27 October 2022).
- Eurofound. Fifth Round of the Living, Working and COVID-19 e-Survey: Living in a New Era of Uncertainty; European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions: Luxembourg, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Buomprisco, G.; Ricci, S.; Perri, R.; Sio, S.D. Health and Telework: New Challenges after COVID-19 Pandemic. Eur. J. Environ. Public Health 2021, 5, em0073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Eurofound. Employee Monitoring and Surveillance: The Challenges of Digitalisation; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Samek Lodovici, M.; Ferrari, E.; Paladino, E.; Pesce, F.; Frecassetti, P.; Aram, E.; Hadjivassiliou, K.; Junge, K.; Hahne, A.S.; Drabble, D.; et al. The Impact of Teleworking and Digital Work on Workers and Society: Special Focus on Surveillance and Monitoring, as Well as on Mental Health of Workers; European Parliament: Luxembourg, 2021; ISBN 978-92-846-8253-9. [Google Scholar]
- Linden, M. Telework Research and Practice: Impacts on People with Disabilities. Work 2014, 48, 65–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bouziri, H.; Smith, D.R.M.; Descatha, A.; Dab, W.; Jean, K. Working from Home in the Time of COVID-19: How to Best Preserve Occupational Health? Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 77, 509–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roquelaure, Y.; Luce, D.; Descatha, A.; Bonvallot, N.; Porro, B.; Coutarel, F. Un modèle organisationnel de l’exposome professionnel. Med. Sci. 2022, 38, 288–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EU-OSHA. Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: Prevention Report; European Agency for Safety and Health at Work: Luxembourg, 2008; Available online: https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/report-work-related-musculoskeletal-disorders-prevention-report (accessed on 12 January 2023).
- Knardahl, S.; Christensen, J.O. Working at Home and Expectations of Being Available: Effects on Perceived Work Environment, Turnover Intentions, and Health. Scand. J. Work. Environ. Health 2022, 48, 99–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Oakman, J.; Kinsman, N.; Stuckey, R.; Graham, M.; Weale, V. A Rapid Review of Mental and Physical Health Effects of Working at Home: How Do We Optimise Health? BMC Public Health 2020, 20, 1825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- dos Santos, I.N.; Pernambuco, M.L.; da Silva, A.M.B.; de Andrade Ruela, G.; de Oliveira, A.S. Association between Musculoskeletal Pain and Telework in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Integrative Review/Associacao Entre Dor Musculoesqueletica e Teletrabalho No Contexto Da Pandemia de COVID-19: Uma Revisao Integrativa. Rev. Bras. Med. Trab. 2021, 19, 342–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liberati, A.; Altman, D.G.; Tetzlaff, J.; Mulrow, C.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Ioannidis, J.P.A.; Clarke, M.; Devereaux, P.J.; Kleijnen, J.; Moher, D. The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2009, 62, e1–e34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Woodruff, T.J.; Sutton, P. The Navigation Guide Systematic Review Methodology: A Rigorous and Transparent Method for Translating Environmental Health Science into Better Health Outcomes. Environ. Health Perspect. 2014, 122, 1007–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Deshmukh, T.S.K.; Phadke, S.D. Impact of Work from Home (WFH) Related Behavioural, Psychological & Ergonomic Factors on Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in It Professionals during COVID 19 Pandamic And Need of Guided Tele Physiotherapy: An Online Social Networking (Osn) Survey. Int. J. Res. Anal. Rev. 2020, 7, 383–397. [Google Scholar]
- Guler, M.A.; Guler, K.; Guneser Gulec, M.; Ozdoglar, E. Working From Home During a Pandemic: Investigation of the Impact of COVID-19 on Employee Health and Productivity. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2021, 63, 731–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, R.; Verma, V.; Rana, K.B.; Meena, M.L. Effect of Physical Activity Intervention on the Musculoskeletal Health of University Student Computer Users during Homestay. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2022, 29, 25–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Matsugaki, R.; Ishimaru, T.; Hino, A.; Muramatsu, K.; Nagata, T.; Ikegami, K.; Tateishi, S.; Tsuji, M.; Matsuda, S.; Fujino, Y.; et al. Low Back Pain and Telecommuting in Japan: Influence of Work Environment Quality. J. Occup. Health 2022, 64, e12329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Matsugaki, R.; Muramatsu, K.; Tateishi, S.; Nagata, T.; Tsuji, M.; Hino, A.; Ikegami, K.; Fujino, Y.; Matsuda, S. CORoNaWork Project Association Between Telecommuting Environment and Low Back Pain Among Japanese Telecommuting Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2021, 63, e944–e948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Minoura, A.; Ishimaru, T.; Kokaze, A.; Tabuchi, T. Increased Work from Home and Low Back Pain among Japanese Desk Workers during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 12363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Muniandy, R.K.; Mudin, K.; Yeap, B.T.; Voo, S.K.P. Increased Incidence and Aetiological Factors of Back Pain among Universiti Malaysia Sabah Staff and Undergraduates during the COVID-19 Lockdown Period. Med. J. Malays. 2022, 77, 185–188. [Google Scholar]
- Regmi, A.; Suresh, J.; Asokan, R. Changes in Work Patterns during COVID-19 Lockdown and Its Impact on the Eyes and Body. Clin. Exp. Optom. 2022, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Šagát, P.; Bartík, P.; Prieto González, P.; Tohănean, D.I.; Knjaz, D. Impact of COVID-19Quarantine on Low Back Pain Intensity, Prevalence, and Associated Risk Factors among Adult Citizens Residing in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia): A Cross-Sectional Study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, E7302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tezuka, M.; Nagata, T.; Saeki, K.; Tsuboi, Y.; Fukutani, N. Association Between Abrupt Change to Teleworking and Physical Symptoms During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Emergency Declaration in Japan. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2022, 64, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widianawati, E.; Khorioni, A.; Nugroho, B.Y.S.; Wulan, W.R. The Ergonomics Design of Work-From-Home Facility during COVID-19 Outbreak InIndonesia and Its Implications for Musculoskeletal. Pak. J. Med. Health Sci. 2020, 14, 1619–1622. [Google Scholar]
- Aegerter, A.M.; Deforth, M.; Johnston, V.; Sjøgaard, G.; Volken, T.; Luomajoki, H.; Dratva, J.; Dressel, H.; Distler, O.; Elfering, A.; et al. No Evidence for an Effect of Working from Home on Neck Pain and Neck Disability among Swiss Office Workers: Short-Term Impact of COVID-19. Eur. Spine J. 2021, 30, 1699–1707. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Argus, M.; Pääsuke, M. Effects of the COVID-19 Lockdown on Musculoskeletal Pain, Physical Activity, and Work Environment in Estonian Office Workers Transitioning to Working from Home. Work 2021, 69, 741–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bailly, F.; Genevay, S.; Foltz, V.; Bohm-Sigrand, A.; Zagala, A.; Nizard, J.; Petit, A. Effects of COVID-19 Lockdown on Low Back Pain Intensity in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients: Results of the Multicenter CONFI-LOMB Study. Eur. Spine J. 2022, 31, 159–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Moretti, A.; Menna, F.; Aulicino, M.; Paoletta, M.; Liguori, S.; Iolascon, G. Characterization of Home Working Population during COVID-19 Emergency: A Cross-Sectional Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prieto-González, P.; Šutvajová, M.; Lesňáková, A.; Bartík, P.; Buľáková, K.; Friediger, T. Back Pain Prevalence, Intensity, and Associated Risk Factors among Female Teachers in Slovakia during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study. Healthcare 2021, 9, 860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Radulović, A.H.; Žaja, R.; Milošević, M.; Radulović, B.; Luketić, I.; Božić, T. Work from Home and Musculoskeletal Pain in Telecommunications Workers during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Pilot Study. Arch. Ind. Hyg. Toxicol. 2021, 72, 232–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez-Nogueira, O.; Leiros-Rodriguez, R.; Benitez-Andrades, J.A.; Alvarez-Alvarez, M.J.; Marques-Sanchez, P.; Pinto-Carral, A. Musculoskeletal Pain and Teleworking in Times of the COVID-19: Analysis of the Impact on the Workers at Two Spanish Universities. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- El Kadri Filho, F.; Roberto de Lucca, S. Telework during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Ergonomic and Psychosocial Risks among Brazilian Labor Justice Workers. Work 2022, 71, 395–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerding, T.; Syck, M.; Daniel, D.; Naylor, J.; Kotowski, S.E.; Gillespie, G.L.; Freeman, A.M.; Huston, T.R.; Davis, K.G. An Assessment of Ergonomic Issues in the Home Offices of University Employees Sent Home Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Work 2021, 68, 981–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Houle, M.; Lessard, A.; Marineau-Bélanger, É.; Lardon, A.; Marchand, A.-A.; Descarreaux, M.; Abboud, J. Factors Associated with Headache and Neck Pain among Telecommuters—A Five Days Follow-Up. BMC Public Health 2021, 21, 1086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- MacLean, K.F.E.; Neyedli, H.F.; Dewis, C.; Frayne, R.J. The Role of at Home Workstation Ergonomics and Gender on Musculoskeletal Pain. Work 2022, 71, 309–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oakman, J.; Kinsman, N.; Lambert, K.; Stuckey, R.; Graham, M.; Weale, V. Working from Home in Australia during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Results from the Employees Working From Home (EWFH) Study. BMJ Open 2022, 12, e052733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Siqueira, L.T.D.; Santos, A.P.D.; Silva, R.L.F.; Moreira, P.A.M.; Vitor, J.d.S.; Ribeiro, V.V. Vocal Self-Perception of Home Office Workers During the COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Voice 2023, 37, 144.e15–144.e22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- EU-OSHA. The Digitalisation of Work: Psychosocial Risk Factors and Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders. Available online: https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/digitalisation-work-psychosocial-risk-factors-and-work-related-musculoskeletal (accessed on 19 December 2022).
- Roquelaure, Y. Musculoskeletal Disorders and Psychosocial Factors at Work. Available online: https://www.etui.org/publications/reports/musculoskeletal-disorders-and-psychosocial-factors-at-work (accessed on 1 December 2022).
- Cruz-Ausejo, L.; Copez-Lonzoy, A.; Vilela-Estrada, A.L.; Valverde, J.J.; Bohórquez, M.; Moscoso-Porras, M. Can Working at Home Be a Hazard? Ergonomic Factors Associated with Musculoskeletal Disorders among Teleworkers during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping Review. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2022, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Camacho, S.; Barrios, A. Teleworking and Technostress: Early Consequences of a COVID-19 Lockdown. Cogn. Technol. Work. 2022, 24, 441–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gajendran, R.S.; Harrison, D.A. The Good, the Bad, and the Unknown about Telecommuting: Meta-Analysis of Psychological Mediators and Individual Consequences. J. Appl. Psychol. 2007, 92, 1524–1541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Baker, P.M.A.; Moon, N.W.; Ward, A.C. Virtual Exclusion and Telework: Barriers and Opportunities of Technocentric Workplace Accommodation Policy. Work 2006, 27, 421–430. [Google Scholar]
Author | Country | Population | Number Included | Definition of MSD Outcome | Confounding | Results | Limitations of Authors |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aegerter, 2021 * | Switzerland | Swiss office workers aged 18–65 years, working more than 25 h per week in sedentary office work, able to communicate in German, in the control cohort between January and April 2020, who answered the COVID-19-related questions in full and were working from home at the time of follow-up | 58 | NP severity and disability in the last 4 weeks: numeric rating scale and ND index | Fixed effects for workstation ergonomics, working hours at the computer, number of breaks during work, and time | No evidence that ND, number of work breaks, number of hours of computer work changed between pre-COVID-19 (WFH). Evidence of a 0.68-point reduction in NP intensity during the lockdown (95% CI 1.35 to 0.00). Possible increase of the effect of number of hours working on a computer and quality of workplace ergonomics on NP intensity. Possible decrease of the effect of the number of daily work breaks on ND. Strong evidence of poorer workstation ergonomics at home compared to the office | Population in the public sector, social desirability bias, low follow-up, retrospective report of workstation ergonomics at the office at follow-up, no objective criteria for assessing workstation ergonomics |
Argus, 2021 * | Estonia | Job described as office work, working with a computer at least 6 h per day, age 18–60 years. | 161 | Modified NORDIC MSD questionnaire (personalized scale assessing the onset and evolution of the pain) | None | There were no statistically significant differences in the prevalence of MSP before and during the COVID-19 lockdown in different body areas and in total. | Questionnaire-based design, retrospective questions, and absence of data about psychosocial factors and pain intensity |
Bailly, 2022 * | France, Switzerland | From the multicenter CONFI-LOMB study regrouping patients from hospitals and one private rheumatology: Adult who undergone a consultation for a common chronic LBP between 1 January 2020, and 17 March 2020 (start of the French lockdown) | 360 | Change in LBP intensity prior to the lockdown and during lockdown assessed by a 7-point Likert scale | None | In bivariate analyses, LBP increased in the case of teleworking during lockdown (p = 0.069) but not in the case of workstation dedicated to teleworking (p = 0.249) or equipment adapted to telework (p = 0.355) | Cross-sectional design, self-administered and anonymous computerized questionnaire patients from tertiary centers |
Deshmukh, 2020 * | India | IT professionals working 100% from home for at least a 6 month period | 100 | Nordic MSD Questionnaire | None | Results are difficult to interpret because of lack of details | Self-reported data, possibly underestimated their WMSDs to avoid being viewed negatively and small sample size |
El Kadri Filho, 2022 * | Brazil | Employees of a Regional Labor Court who were teleworking specifically because of the need for social isolation | 55 | Nordic MSD questionnaire | None | Regions with the most complaints in the last 6 months and last 7 days were shoulders, neck, and wrists/hands. Posture and job demand exposure assessment was significantly corelated with MSK problems | Only workers in the labor judiciary, data collection eight months after the onset of the pandemic, cross-sectional design |
Gerding, 2021 * | USA | All faculty staff, and administration employed by the University of Cincinnati | 843 | Level of discomfort numeric rating scale for several body regions | None | >40% employees reported moderate to severe discomfort levels in the eyes/neck/head, upper back/shoulders, and lower back regions. Prior to COVID-19, 78.5% experienced little to no discomfort while working in their office setting, and 21.5% had moderate to severe discomfort. Increased glare and lack of having contact with the back of the chair increased discomfort for various body areas | Only staff from one public university, self-reported data on postures and discomfort, retrospective data, and low response rate (10%) |
Guler, 2021 * | Turkey? | Workers from companies that started working from home after the pandemic and who practice desk work using a computer | 194 | Nordic MSD Questionnaire and Visual Analog Scale for work-related pain | Multivariate analysis included independent variables with p-values < 0.05 in the univariate analyses | Mean LBP significantly increased during pandemic (WFH) compared to before: 3.14 to 3.56 (p = 0.03). LBP was associated with lumbar support before the pandemic, stress level during WFH, general health status, sleep duration, and rest quality during WFH in the multivariate regression model | Cross-sectional design, low number of participants, some specific activities (treadmill, exercise bikes, pilates) were not considered separately, no evaluation of COVID infection during WFH, and no assessment of income changes during WFH |
Houle, 2021 * | Canada | Participants aged between 18 and 65 years old and in a full-time telecommuting situation at least one week prior to enrollment | 162 | NP occurrence, intensity (numerical rating scale) and NP assessed by the Neck Bournemouth Questionnaire (NBQ) | Multivariate analysis with a stepwise method | 70% reported at least one NP episode during follow-up. No work-related variables were associated with occurrence of NP episode, including presence of home workstation, headset wearing, telecommuting hours and headset wearing hours. Among telecommuters, NP-related disability was associated with future NP occurrence | Significant attrition following the initial assessment, impossibility to assess other health complaints, no distinction between headache and NP types, small sample size and no assessment of potential factors |
Jain, 2022 * | India | University computer users at two Indian universities, over 18 years old, attending regular online classes, performing at least 150–200 min of PA per week | 40 | Corlett and Bishop’s body part discomfort scale | None | The region with the highest discomfort on the Corlett and Bishop’s scale before intervention was wrist/forearm (8.17 +/− 1.45), lower back (8.01 +/− 1.42), and neck (7.40 +/− 2.71) | Only university students |
Knardahl, 2022 | Norway | All office workers from private and public organizations recruited from a previous project between 2004–2019 | Cross-sectional sample: 7861 Prospective sample: 5258 | Reported NP in the last four weeks with a four-level intensity scale and duration of complaint | Adjusted for working more than regular hours, gender, age, skill level, management responsibility, year of measurement (mixed effects regression) | NP not statistically associated with time working at home (hours): aOR and 95% CI compared to 0 h: 0 to 2 h, 0.93 (0.77–1.12), 2 to 5 h, 0.89 (0.71–1.11), 5 to 15, 0.82 (0.63–1.07), more than 15 h, 0.65 (0.38–1.11). Availability expectations was associated with NP | Changes in contents of office jobs between 2004–2020, subjective reports, and cross-sectional design |
MacLean, 2022 * | Canada | Staff, administration, and faculty employed by Dalhousie University and primarily working from home with limited on campus access to offices and laboratories since lockdown | 445 | Changes in work-related discomfort since WFH (Likert scale) and current discomfort and pain using the Nordic MSD Questionnaire and a numeric rating scale | None | 61% reported an increase in MSK pain. Area with most reported at least moderate pain were neck, shoulders, and lower back. Seat height and monitor distance were associated with MSK discomfort or pain, respectively β and 95% CI: 6.0 (3.1, 9.0) and 3.3 (0.5,5.9) | Population may be biased (more administrative, women), selection bias, model could not account for certain aspects of home workstation, self-assessed, anonymous WFH ergonomics and perceived musculoskeletal discomfort and pain |
Matsugaki, 2021 * | Japan | Population of workers currently in possession of an employment contract who responded that they mainly performed desk work and telecommuted at least once a week | 3663 | Reported occurrence of stiff shoulder, of LBP in the past 2 weeks, and the average severity of LBP on a numeric rating scale | Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, lifestyle habit (smoking, drinking, PA), number of days with poor mental health (past 30 days), income, educational background, working time, frequency of telecommuting, company size | Telecommuting environment factors (yes/no) associated with LBP were: aOR 95% CI, having enough light on desk 1.43 (1.18–1.73), having enough space to stretch legs 1.30 (1.10–1.54), having a place to concentrate on work 1.38 (1.17–1.64), having appropriate temperature and humidity comfort 1.32 (1.13–1.56), and having enough space on the desk 1.19 (1.02–1.39). Using an office desk or chair was no associated with LBP | History and medication of LBP are unknown, subjective report of home office, lifestyle factors, and working condition, and possibility of a selection bias (more WFH for LBP workers?) |
Matsugaki, 2022 * | Japan | Population of workers currently in possession of an employment contract | 12,774 | Reported occurrence of stiff shoulder, of LBP in the past 2 weeks and the average severity of LBP on a numeric rating scale | Adjusted for age, gender, BMI, marital status, education, income, lifestyle habit (smoking, alcohol, PA), psychological status, company size | LBP was associated with frequency of teleworking aOR 95% CI compared to reference (Almost never): ≤1 d/w 1.18 (0.99–1.41), 2 to 3 d/w 1.27 (1.08–1.50), ≥4 d/w 1.15 (1.01–1.32), p-value of trend = 0.003. In a good telecommuting environment, OR did not increase with telecommuting frequency contrary to poor teleworking environment | Subjective assessment of work environment, potential unmeasured confounds, no consideration of duration of workers’ telecommuting engagement and cross-sectional design |
Minoura, 2021 * | Japan | Respondents selected from panelists registered within a Japanese Internet survey agency | 4227 | Occurrence of LBP in the last month and time of appearance (before/after pandemic) | Adjusted for age, sex, weight, education, marital status, having children, outdoor PA during the COVID-19, psychological distress, smoking, alcohol, comorbidities, employment, income level, working time | LBP was associated with increased WFH (yes vs. no) among desk workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: aOR 2.13 (1.52–2.97) | Cross-sectional design, low response rate, potential selection bias, no information on medical LBP diagnosis and quality of work environment, residual confounders, possible time lag between survey and LBP |
Moretti, 2020 * | Italy | Population of mobile workers employed as administrative officers that moved to work remotely since the beginning of COVID-19 health emergency | 51 | Brief Pain Inventory for assessing LBP and NP | None | Main regions for MSK pain were the lower back (41.2%) and the neck (23.5%). Since WFH, NP worsened for 50% participants (N = 6), and 38.1% for LBP (N = 8) | Small sample size, population of a single Italian region, cross-sectional design, some confounders could not be assessed |
Muniandy, 2022 * | Malaysia | Lecturers and students of UMS who were actively involved in teaching and learning during the pandemic period | 842 | Back pain intensity using a numeric rating scale | None | Among newly diagnosed back pain lumbar region was the most frequent (62.1%), and LBP increased after lockdown. Poor ergonomic sitting was associated with mild LBP: OR CI 95% 2.0 (1.2–3.6) | Population of predominantly people higher formal education, survey online accessibility |
Oakman, 2022 * | Australia | Participants from across Australia, aged 18 years or older, working from home at least 2 days per week during the period following declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, currently living in Australia | 924 | MSD pain frequency using a 5-point Likert scale and intensity using a 3-point Likert scale | None | After the pandemic, WFH increased for most participants (92.9%). Over 70% reported pain or discomfort at the end of their working day, with a higher level of neck/shoulder pain and hips/legs/feet pain for females | Potential selection bias due to the geographical and gender sample repartition, cross-sectional design |
Prieto-González, 2021 * | Slovakia | Pedagogues in Slovakia during the introduction of online classes (January 2021 during COVID-19 pandemic), working in Slovakia in primary, secondary, tertiary, or special needs schools and aged between 18 and 65 years | 782 | Pain intensity using a numeric rating scale | None | 74.84% reported cervical pain and 67.68% reported LBP. The number of days of online classes/week was associated with increased pain intensity: 1/w 3.33 (1.17), 2/w 3.17 (1.07), 3/w 3.46 (1.18), 4/w 3.51 (1.08), and 5/w 3.58 (1.01). Teachers not complying with ergonomic recommendations and sitting most of the time had a higher level of pain intensity | Potential selection bias, detailed medical information available |
Radulović, 2021 * | Croatia | Telecommunications company workers working from home for eight months (from 16 March to 4 December 2020) before joining the study | 232 | Changes in MSD pain before and after WFH using a 3-point Likert scale | None | Among reported LBP, 39.1% had stronger pain when working at home than in the office. Complaint of more severe pain at home than in the office was correlated with not having an ergonomic chair or office desk, longer working hours at home, disturbance at home and women | No limitations reported |
Regmi, 2022 * | India | Working population and students across India | 1302 | Frequency of work-related MSD symptoms while using a digital 4-point Likert scale | None | 88% reported work related MSK disorders among which 45% had these symptoms for the first time. MSK symptoms were not statistically associated with WFH (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34–1.09), but there were associated with hours of work at home >8 h/d (3.06, 1.89–4.96) | Convenience sampling, students and health care sector population, general health issues and other ocular problems not considered |
Rodriguez-Nogueira, 2021 * | Spain | Workers at two Spanish universities employed for at least six months, actively teleworking during the confinement period (between March and May 2020) | 472 | Nordic MSD Questionnaire adapted to Spanish | None | There was a decrease of pain reported overall during confinement compared to the previous 12 months (p < 0.001) | Self-reported stress, pain and PA, cross-sectional design, population of two Spanish universities |
Šagát, 2020 * | Saudi Arabia | Resident in Saudi Arabia staying in Riyadh before and during the quarantine, aged between 18 and 64 years | 463 | Location and intensity of pain on a numerical scale | None | Among subject who WFH or did distance learning during quarantine, there was more MSK pain reported compared to before (48.3% vs. 3.9%). Pain intensity was higher during quarantine than before for subjects WFH or distance learning: mean pain (2.64 vs. 1.97). Subjects who telework or had distance learning had statistically higher MSK pain compared to those who did not (2.63 vs. 2.27) | Certain measurements not included (inflammatory biomarkers, vitamin D levels), assessment of LBP intensity four weeks after confinement, no inclusion of chronic conditions hospitalized patients |
Siqueira, 2020 * | Brazil | Brazilian individuals aged between 18 and 59 years | 424 | Frequency (4-point Likert scale) and MSK pain assessed by the “MSD Pain Investigation Questionnaire” | None | Individuals WFH reported statistically higher frequency of pain than those working in the usual workplace. Individuals WFH had increased frequency of pain during pandemic compared to before in the neck (1.23 vs. 1.05), shoulders (1.33 vs. 1.13), and upper back (1.41 vs. 1.20) | Potential reporting bias on data before pandemic |
Tezuka, 2022 * | Japan | Full-time workers of the two non-ferrous metal companies, aged 20 years or more, and non-teleworker before the emergency declaration | 917 | Presence of physical symptoms (from leading symptoms in the National Lifestyle Survey of Japan) not due to COVID-19 infection during the emergency | Adjusted for age, sex, BMI, marital status, occupational status, and stiff shoulders before the emergency declaration | Telework frequency was statistically associated with LBP during emergency declaration: compared to 0 days of telework, aOR and 95% CI, 1–2/w 3.83 (1.41–10.36), 3–4/w 6.09 (2.33–15.94), 5 or more/w 5.57 (2.22–14.00) | Cross-sectional design, potential recall bias, potential selection bias due to the low response rate (34.6%), high percentage of men in the sample and survey distribution method |
Widianawati, 2020 * | Indonesia | WFH workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia | 50 | MSD pain assessed by a numerical scale | None | 28% of workers reported complaints of low MSD with an average pain value of 50.44. The most frequent regions for pain were the neck and the lower back | No limitations reported |
Name | 1. Are the Study Groups at Risk of Not Representing Their Source Populations in a Manner That Might Introduce Selection Bias? | 2. Was Knowledge of the Group Assignments Inadequately Prevented (i.e., Blinded or Masked) during the Study, Potentially Leading to Subjective Measurement of Either Exposure or Outcome? | 3. Were Exposure Assessment Methods Lacking Accuracy? | 4. Were Outcome Assessment Methods Lacking Accuracy? | 5. Was Potential Confounding Inadequately Incorporated? | 6. Were Incomplete Outcome Data Inadequately Addressed? | 7. Does the Study Report Appear to Have Selective Outcome Reporting? | 8. Did the Study Receive any Support from a Company, Study Author, or Other Entity Having a Financial Interest in any of the Exposures Studied? | 9. Did the Study Appear to Have Other Problems That Could Put It at a Risk of Bias? Population Studied Does Not Represent General Teleworker Population or No Control Group |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aegerter 2021 | Probably low | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | Probably low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably low |
Argus 2021 | Probably low | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | Probably high | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Bailly 2022 | Low | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Deshmukh 2020 | High | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | High | Probably low | Not applicable | Probably low | High |
El Kadri Filho 2022 | Low | Not applicable | Low | Low | High | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Gerding 2021 | High | Not applicable | Probably high | Probably high | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Guler 2021 | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Low | Probably high | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Houle 2021 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | Probably high | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | High |
Jain 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably high | Low | Probably high | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | High |
Knardahl 2022 | Low | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low | Low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
MacLean 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | Probably low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Matsugaki 2021 | Low | Not applicable | Low | Low | Low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably low |
Matsugaki 2022 | Low | Not applicable | Low | Probably low | Low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Low |
Minoura 2021 | Low | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low | Low | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Moretti 2020 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | High | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Muniandy 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably high | Probably low | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Oakman 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low | High | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Prieto-Gonzalez 2021 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably high | Probably high | Probably high | Low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Radulovic 2021 | Probably low | Not applicable | Probably high | Probably high | High | Low | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably high |
Regmi 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | High |
Rodriguez-Nogueira 2021 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Low | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Sagat 2020 | Low | Not applicable | Probably high | Probably low | Probably high | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably high |
Siqueira 2020 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably high | High | Probably low | Not applicable | Low | Probably low |
Tezuka 2022 | Probably high | Not applicable | Low | Probably high | Low | Probably low | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably low |
Widianawati 2020 | Probably high | Not applicable | Probably low | Probably high | High | Low | Not applicable | Probably low | High |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Fadel, M.; Bodin, J.; Cros, F.; Descatha, A.; Roquelaure, Y. Teleworking and Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 4973. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064973
Fadel M, Bodin J, Cros F, Descatha A, Roquelaure Y. Teleworking and Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2023; 20(6):4973. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064973
Chicago/Turabian StyleFadel, Marc, Julie Bodin, Florence Cros, Alexis Descatha, and Yves Roquelaure. 2023. "Teleworking and Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20, no. 6: 4973. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20064973