Background
Methods
Search strategy
Inclusion criteria
-
Studies which postulate that the chair has an influence on biomechanics;
-
Studies with children or adults in predominantly seated occupations;
-
Any trial with pre and post testing, including controlled, randomised or a single subject design;
-
The outcome measure included neuro-musculoskeletal comfort and/or postural alignment. Examples of these outcomes include (but are not limited to) signs and symptoms of pain and discomfort that may be attributable to biomechanical alterations of the neuro-musculo-skeletal systems, as distinct from pain from an alternative pathology such as systemic joint disease.
Risk of bias assessment
Data extraction
Results
Study selection
Risk of bias assessment
Study characteristics
Author (ref) | Country | Design | n | Population | Intervention | Measures | Outcomes | Conclusion | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wang et al. 2008[17] | USA | RCT | 293 (subset of operators with Rempel 2007 with lower p) Group n= (111;84;98) | Sewing machine operators with back /hip pain | Gp 1: control | Pre and post monthly for 4/12: Pain symptoms- intensity (1-5) and frequency | Mean pain Improv’t gp 2 vs 1: 0.25(95%CI: 0.16, 0.34);GP3 vs 1: 0.43 (0.34-0.51) per month. | Adjustable, swivelling chairs offer advantage (reduction in LB/Hip pain) for workers in seated/UL occupations; flat pan superior to curved? | Obtain means and sd for pain scores for each group (presented graphically in Fig 5A) at 4/12f/u |
Gp2: curved pan chair | |||||||||
Gp 3: flat seat pan chair (all received misc items, chairs hgt adjustable) | |||||||||
Remple et al. 2008[19] | USA | RCT | 277 (subset with upper p) Group n pain (105;72;100) | Sewing machine operators with neck/ shoulder pain | Gp 1: control Gp2: curved pan chair Gp 3: flat seat pan chair (all received miscel items; intervention chairs hgt adjustable) | Pre and post monthly for 4/12: Pain symptoms- intensity (1-5) and frequency | Mean pain Improv’t gp 2 vs 1: 0.34 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.41); GP3 vs 1: 0.14 (.07-.022) per month. | Adjustable, swivelling chairs offer advantage (reduction in Cx/shoulder pain) for workers in seated/ UL occupations; curved pan superior to flat? | Obtain means and sd for pain scores for each group (presented graphically in Fig 5A) at 4/12f/u |
Amick et al. 2003[4] | USA | RCT (assigned according to office location) | 192(87;52;S3) | Office workers (>4hrs per day at computer;>6 hrs per day sitting) | Gp1: adjustable chair + training | Pre (2xmonthly) and post intervention (3x over 1 year). Musculo- skeletal symptoms-1. Growth over workday 2. Average pain over workday | Symptom growth over workday: Gp 1<gp2/3 at 12/12f/u (p=0.012). Ave pain levels: Reduced for both Gp 1+2 compared to Gp3 | Highly adjustable chairs plus training resulted in less end of day pain and reduced average pain (largest reduction in neck/shoulder, followed by upper and lower back) | Cant separate chair as sole intervention but clear that chair + info is superior to info alone or nothing. |
Gp2: training only | |||||||||
Gp3: no intervention | |||||||||
Herbert et al. 2001 [20 | USA | Pre and post test | 36 | Garment workers (“spooling” task), female | Adjustable chairs and training in their use | MS symptom survey prior to and 6/12 after introduction. Joint position in sitting via video (subgroup only). Upper limbs only. | Baseline pain report89% of group; post 63.9% (p=0.007); Reduction in severity at 10/11 anatomic sites after intervention. Only modest declines in awkward posture (small n) | Reduction in people with pain and reduction in severity overall at upper limb anatomical sites. Inconclusive posture change findings. | |
Gadge et al. 2007[18] | Australia | Sungle case, multiple baseline (ABAB) | 4 | University students (sitting “most of the time”) | Standard office chair (adjustable) vs “saddle” seat | (dis) Comfort (VAS); Production (typing task speed and accuracy); Posture (videotape) Multiple measures across 4 phases. | Discomfort in lower back increased over time in both chairs but less so in the saddle; discomfort was significantly worse in lower limbs in saddle chair; Productivity no change; Greater trunk to thigh angles in saddle. | Some benefits for lower back discomfort and posture in saddle but also issues (lower limb discomfort). |
Study outcomes
Data analysis
Discussion
Recommendations
-
Clearly defined interventions;
-
Outcome measures that include symptoms as well as performance;
-
Cost-effectiveness needs to be measured to allow interpretation of health benefits in light of intervention costs;
-
Longer term follow-up to monitor effects after the period of observation/attention;
-
Robust methodology (in particular concealed allocation and randomisation);
-
Other populations including occupational groups in the information technology and call centre industries, adolescents and children who are also required to sit for prolonged periods.