Background
Non-specific neck pain (NP) is a major burden in industry due to lost productivity in terms of absenteeism and presenteeism as well as personal suffering from pain, disability, or reduced quality of life [
1]. Moreover, NP has a high tendency for persistence and recurrence [
1]. In 2010, a Swiss federal directive indicated that 68% of office-workers experienced NP on at least 1 day per year, while a recent study examining representative Zurich-based young and middle-aged adults indicates NP prevalence between 18 and 55%; both percentages appear at the upper end of global estimates [
2,
3]. In another study, 13% of symptomatic office-workers reported reduced work productivity due to NP of nearly 22% [
4].
In a Swiss survey, 35% of more than twelve thousand office-workers complained about having at least one headache episode within the last 4 weeks [
3]. The 12-month-population prevalence for headache was approximately 34% for Switzerland, leading to a second rank for all health-related complaints [
5]. In women in particular, headache ranked first in Switzerland (37%) [
5]. These figures have been confirmed by a European census including 27 states (
n = 28,079), which also comprises data from Switzerland (
n = 871). However, these data relate not only to office-workers [
5].
The workplace is increasingly becoming the arena for many health initiatives not only because of the amount of time an individual spends at the workplace, but also due to the strong link between work and health, and between health and productivity [
6,
7]. Most current workplace-based strategies for the prevention and management of NP in office-workers fall into two broad categories: ergonomic-based interventions targeting the workstation or environment, and exercise-based interventions targeting the workers’ capacity to do their job [
8,
9]. Recent studies examined the effect of workplace ergonomics, neck exercise, or health promotion on the individual burden of pain and disability as summarized below.
Three studies showed a positive effect of an ergonomic intervention on economic burden (productivity), but no effect on the individual burden of pain or disability [
10‐
12]. A systematic review and meta-analysis by Chen et al. [
13] questioned the value of stand-alone workstation ergonomic interventions in the office for people with NP which, is supported by strong evidence of no effect. One study was in favour of a multi-component ergonomic intervention, and another in favour of low monitor angles [
14,
15]. Despite this contradictory and underwhelming evidence supporting workstation ergonomics, it is generally considered best practice for the work environment and most companies now provide workstations that can be adjusted to suit each employee [
16]. However, a worker’s use or non-use of these often expensive items has not been sufficiently explored.
Health promotion is a broad field inclusive of interventions targeting the physical and psychosocial aspects of the individual and the workplace. Two systematic reviews showed a positive effect of health promotion intervention on work productivity [
17,
18].
Exercise is a common treatment for office-workers suffering from musculoskeletal disorders [
19,
20]. Likewise, in office-workers exercises may alleviate headache [
21]. A systematic review and meta-analysis showed that strengthening exercises should be favoured to endurance and stretching exercise for the treatment of NP in office-workers [
22]. An Australian study examined the impact of neck exercises on workplace productivity in monetary terms specific to office-workers within participating companies [
23]. This study found evidence that neck strengthening exercises and best-practice ergonomics positively influence productivity and pain [
23]. Other recent studies show improved productivity with exercise-based interventions [
24‐
28].
Independent of the mode of the intervention (neck exercise, workstation ergonomics, health promotion), adherence to an intervention still remains a huge problem. Different studies observed greater effect with higher participation, which points to a need for an intervention that additionally encourages adherence [
23,
29,
30]. A way to enhance exercise adherence is the use of an exercise app [
31]. Main benefits of an app are the constant availability of the exercise program and an interactive technology with feedback and reminder.
To the authors’ knowledge, no research project has investigated the effect of a multi-component intervention, that includes all current evidenced aspects, and tested it against ‘as usual’ practise to assess the economic burden (work productivity) of prevalent and incident NP. Thus, the aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a multi-component intervention for office-workers that combines the evidence-based interventions of workstation ergonomics, health promotion, neck exercise, and an app to enhance adherence to intervention with regard to productivity, prevalent and incident NP, and headache. The overarching hypothesis is that work productivity will be improved by empowering workers to reduce NP- and headache-related presenteeism and absenteeism. Furthermore, NP, headache and/or disability (primary and secondary prevention) will be reduced and job stress and health-related quality of life will be improved.
Discussion
Summary
NP is a major burden in Swiss office-workers. To the authors’ knowledge, this study is the first that investigates the effect of a multi-component intervention combining the current evidence of workstation ergonomics, health promotion, neck exercises, and an adherence app to impact the economic and individual burden of NP and headache in this population.
Considerations and issues
Study design
As in many intervention studies, drop-outs and non-attendances are anticipated [
13,
23]. Therefore, the sample size calculation is adjusted and adherence to intervention may be optimized using an app. In addition, the intervention will take place at the workplace and, depending on the organisation, almost the whole time needed for the intervention can be counted as working time. As not all participants will receive the intervention at the same time, a contamination of intervention may occur. To minimize this effect, people working on the same floor, in the same room or work group will be in the allocated to the same cluster.
Ethical approval
As every subject will eventually receive the intervention, ethical concerns of negligence should be regarded as unwarranted. The stepped wedge design helps to achieve a similar study power while requiring fewer participants, although more measurement from each [
24,
32].
Safety
No risks of the intervention, except from some temporary muscle soreness due to the exercise intervention and testing have been reported in earlier studies [
27,
29,
80]. Participants suffering from NP or headache may feel an immediate benefit during the study and not only during their working hours. These effects especially depend on adherence to the exercise programme, but also on the feedback to study personnel regarding any longer lasting discomfort or pain due to the interventional programme. A brief worsening of the symptoms may occur at the start of intervention period due to muscular change [
38].
Monitoring and auditing
At minimum of four visits will be conducted by a monitor who is independent of the study (informed consent, data collection and case report forms, data entry, data analysis). Monitoring visits at the investigator’s site prior to the start and during the course of the study will help to follow up the progress of the clinical study, to assure utmost validity of the data and to detect possible errors at an early time point.
Dissemination plan
After the statistical analysis of this trial, the NEXpro (neck exercise productivity) team will publish data in top-ranking journals in medicine and health sciences. In particular, the following publications beyond the study protocol are planned: primary outcome (productivity analysis), studies on secondary and additional outcomes (e.g., neck pain analysis, headache analysis).
Potential implication
It is expected that the study will impact the individual, their place of work, as well as private and public policy and practice regarding healthy behaviours of office-workers. This research will address an unmet organisational need by exploring the impact of an evidence-based intervention over the course of a year.
Acknowledgements
The following are members of the NEXpro collaboration group: Andrea M. Aegerter (Switzerland), Marco Barbero (Switzerland), Beatrice Brunner (Switzerland), Jon Cornwall (New Zealand), Yara Da Cruz Pereira (Switzerland), Manja Deforth (Switzerland), Oliver Distler (Switzerland), Julia Dratva (Switzerland), Holger Dressler (Switzerland), Tobias Egli (Switzerland), Achim Elfering (project co-lead, Switzerland), Markus J. Ernst (Switzerland), Irene Etzer-Hofer (Switzerland), Deborah Falla (United Kingdom), Michelle Gisler (Switzerland), Michelle Haas (Switzerland), Venerina Johnston (Australia), Sandro Klaus (Switzerland), Gina M. Kobelt (Switzerland), Hannu Luomajoki (Switzerland), Kerstin Lüdtke (Germany), Markus Melloh (project lead, Switzerland), Corinne Nicoletti (Switzerland), Seraina Niggli (Switzerland), Salome Richard (Switzerland), Nadine Sax (Switzerland), Katja Schülke (Switzerland), Gisela Sjøgaard (Denmark), Lukas P. Staub (Australia), Thomas Volken (Switzerland), and Thomas Zweig (Switzerland).
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.