PREVALENCE OF WORK-RELATED MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS AMONG IRANIAN ORTHOTISTS AND PROSTHETISTS: A STUDY ON WORK-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Work-related musculoskeletal injuries are prevalent globally and can impact both work efficiency and the quality of services offered to patients. OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among Iranian orthotists and prosthetists and its relationship with work-related quality of life. METHODOLOGY: In this cross-sectional study, the Persian versions of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) and Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) scale were used to identify disorders of different body parts and occupational quality of life. A group of 263 orthotists and prosthetists were invited to complete the questionnaires using a simple random sampling method. The data from 188 respondents were analyzed. The association between WRQoL and the following variables: gender, work experience, age, presence of musculoskeletal disorder, and income level, was assessed using Spearman’s rho correlation coefficient. FINDINGS: There was an 82% prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among the participants. The most common areas involved were the lower back (35%) and neck (28%). There was a statistically significant relationship between gender (rs(188) = 0.16, p = 0.031) and weight (rs(188) = 0.15, p = 0.045) and work-related musculoskeletal disorders, however, the strength of the correlation was very small. Moreover, the WRQoL had a statistically significant but small to negligible relationship with gender (rs(188) = 0.17, p = 0.016), work experience (rs(188) = 0.18, p = 0.011), age (rs(188) = 0.15, p = 0.039), and income (rs(178) = 0.17, p = 0.025). There was no significant relationship between work-related musculoskeletal disorders and the total score of WRQoL scale. CONCLUSION: While the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders is high among Iranian orthotists and prosthetists, the average WRQoL presents an opportunity for improvement. The findings indicate associations between work-related disorders and factors such as gender, work experience, age, and income, emphasizing the need for plans to improve working conditions and prevent these disorders. Conducting ergonomic assessments of workstations, increasing employee income, and implementing training programs that focus on proper lifting techniques, posture, and the use of ergonomic tools may help reduce work-related musculoskeletal disorders in orthotists and prosthetists. Layman's Abstract Work-related musculoskeletal injuries are among the most severe occupational issues worldwide. Orthotists and prosthetists are at a high risk of suffering from musculoskeletal disorders due to repetitive tasks, high workload, poor working conditions, and occupational stress. In this study, the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among Iranian orthotists and prosthetists and its relationship with work-related quality of life were assessed. The studied orthotists and prosthetists had an 82% prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders. This study found a small to negligible relationship between gender and weight with work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Additionally, the work-related quality of life showed a small to negligible connection with gender, work experience, age, and income. However, there was no clear link between work-related musculoskeletal disorders and the overall score on the WRQoL scale. This highlights the need for better working conditions to help prevent these issues. Assessing workstations for ergonomics, increasing employee pay, and offering training on proper lifting techniques, posture, and ergonomic tools may help reduce these disorders among orthotists and prosthetists. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/44064/33651 How To Cite: Azizi S, Moradi V, Hajiaghaei B, Babaee T. Prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among Iranian orthotists and prosthetists: A study on work-related quality of life. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2024; Volume 7, Issue 2, No. 6. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v7i2.44064 Corresponding Author: Dr. Taher Babaee, PhD, CPOAffiliation: Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.E-Mail: babaee.t@iums.ac.irORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1487-2374
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".