Loading...
The prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
Hulshof, Carel T J Pega, Frank Neupane, Subas van der Molen, Henk F Colosio, Claudio Daams, Joost G Descatha, Alexis Kc, Prakash Kuijer, Paul P F M Mandic-Rajcevic, Stefan
Hulshof, Carel T J
Pega, Frank
Neupane, Subas
van der Molen, Henk F
Colosio, Claudio
Daams, Joost G
Descatha, Alexis
Kc, Prakash
Kuijer, Paul P F M
Mandic-Rajcevic, Stefan
Citations
Altmetric:
Series / Report no.
Open Access
Type
Article
Other
Other
Language
en
Date of publication
2020-12-14
Year of publication
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Title
The prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
Translated Title
Published in
Environ Int 2021; 146:106157
Abstract
Five studies (three cross-sectional studies and two cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising 150,895 participants (81,613 females) in 36 countries in two WHO regions (Africa, Europe). The exposure was generally assessed with questionnaire data about self-reported exposure. Estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors are presented for all five included studies, disaggregated by country, sex, 5-year age group, industrial sector or occupational group where feasible. The pooled prevalence of any occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.84, 3 studies, 148,433 participants, 35 countries in the WHO Europe region, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). Subgroup analyses found no statistically significant differences in exposure by sex but differences by age group, occupation and country. No evidence was found for publication bias. We assessed this body evidence to be of low quality, based on serious concerns for risk of bias due to exposure assessment only being based on self-report and for indirectness due to evidence from two WHO regions only.