BENEFITS AND LIABILITIES OF HYPERMOBILITY IN THE BACK PAIN DISORDERS OF INDUSTRIAL-WORKERS

Citation
Lg. Larsson et al., BENEFITS AND LIABILITIES OF HYPERMOBILITY IN THE BACK PAIN DISORDERS OF INDUSTRIAL-WORKERS, Journal of internal medicine, 238(5), 1995, pp. 461-467
Citations number
33
Categorie Soggetti
Medicine, General & Internal
ISSN journal
09546820
Volume
238
Issue
5
Year of publication
1995
Pages
461 - 467
Database
ISI
SICI code
0954-6820(1995)238:5<461:BALOHI>2.0.ZU;2-7
Abstract
Objectives. Back pain disorders, sometimes called 'the nemesis of medi cine and the albatross of industry', are ubiquitous, but have stubborn ly defied diagnosis and treatment. Hypermobility syndrome, which is al so very common, has been called 'an enigma of human physiology', Both conditions have attracted wide attention and interest only recently. I n an earlier study, we considered the benefits and liabilities of join t hypermobility by studying 660 musicians in the USA, In a parallel ma nner, the present study analysed the back pain disorders of 606 worker s in a Swedish high-technology industrial plant in the context of spin al hypermobility, Subjects and methods. The 606 industrial workers wer e examined for spinal hypermobility using a standard protocol, and int erviewed for work-related body-posture requirements and the low back, shoulder and neck pain disorders experienced by them. The data were an alysed for associations between hypermobility and physical complaints as a whole, and by taking into account gender and body-postures at wor k. Results. Twenty-six per cent (37) of 144 workers with hypermobility but only 14% (64) of 453 without hypermobility experienced back pain (P < 0.002), Among the 326 workers with sitting or standing jabs, 40% (29) of 71 with hypermobility had back pain, whereas only 12% (30) of the 255 without hypermobility experienced back pain (P < 0.001), The c orresponding numbers with back pain for 235 in jobs with changing body -postures were 4.5% (3) of 66 with hypermobility and 14% (14) of 169 w ithout hypermobility (P = 0.04). Conclusions, Hypermobility of the spi ne is an asset if the work requires change of body-posture, but a liab ility for those in a standing or sitting assignment. It reinforces a s imilar hypothesis proposed by Larsson et al.