Associations of occupational standing with musculoskeletal symptoms: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Given the high exposure to occupational standing in specific occupations, and recent initiatives to encourage intermittent standing among white-collar workers, a better understanding of the potential health consequences of occupational standing is required. We aimed to review and quantify the epidemiological evidence on associations of occupational standing with musculoskeletal symptoms. DESIGN: A systematic review was performed. Data from included articles were extracted and described, and meta-analyses conducted when data were sufficiently homogeneous. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases were systematically searched. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Peer-reviewed articles on occupational standing and musculoskeletal symptoms from epidemiological studies were identified. RESULTS: Of the 11 750 articles screened, 50 articles reporting 49 studies were included (45 cross-sectional and 5 longitudinal; n=88 158 participants) describing the associations of occupational standing with musculoskeletal symptoms, including low-back (39 articles), lower extremity (14 articles) and upper extremity (18 articles) symptoms. In the meta-analysis, 'substantial' (>4 hours/workday) occupational standing was associated with the occurrence of low-back symptoms (pooled OR (95% CI) 1.31 (1.10 to 1.56)). Evidence on lower and upper extremity symptoms was too heterogeneous for meta-analyses. The majority of included studies reported statistically significant detrimental associations of occupational standing with lower extremity, but not with upper extremity symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence suggests that substantial occupational standing is associated with the occurrence of low-back and (inconclusively) lower extremity symptoms, but there may not be such an association with upper extremity symptoms. However, these conclusions are tentative as only limited evidence was found from high-quality, longitudinal studies with fully adjusted models using objective measures of standing.

Associations of prolonged standing with musculoskeletal symptoms-A systematic review of laboratory studies.

While prolonged standing has shown to be detrimentally associated with musculoskeletal symptoms, exposure limits and underlying mechanisms are not well understood. We systematically reviewed evidence from laboratory studies on musculoskeletal symptom development during prolonged (≥20min) uninterrupted standing, quantified acute dose-response associations and described underlying mechanisms. Peer-reviewed articles were systematically searched for. Data from included articles were tabulated, and dose-response associations were statistically pooled. A linear interpolation of pooled dose-response associations was performed to estimate the duration of prolonged standing associated with musculoskeletal symptoms with a clinically relevant intensity of ≥9 (out of 100). We included 26 articles (from 25 studies with 591 participants), of which the majority examined associations of prolonged standing with low back and lower extremity symptoms. Evidence on other (e.g., upper limb) symptoms was limited and inconsistent. Pooled dose-response associations showed that clinically relevant levels of low back symptoms were reached after 71min of prolonged standing, with this shortened to 42min in those considered pain developers. Regarding standing-related low back symptoms, consistent evidence was found for postural mechanisms (i.e., trunk flexion and lumbar curvature), but not for mechanisms of muscle fatigue and/or variation in movement. Blood pooling was the most consistently reported mechanism for standing-related lower extremity symptoms. Evidence suggests a detrimental association of prolonged standing with low back and lower extremity symptoms. To avoid musculoskeletal symptoms (without having a-priori knowledge on whether someone will develop symptoms or not), dose-response evidence from this study suggests a recommendation to refrain from standing for prolonged periods >40min. Interventions should also focus on underlying pain mechanisms.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender parents seeking health care for their children: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the issues faced by lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)-parented families in relation to their access to and satisfaction with healthcare services for their children. It is thought that LGBT individuals have experienced negative interactions with the healthcare environment. AIMS: To systematically review the literature investigating the experience of LGBT parents seeking health care for their children. METHODS: A search of the following databases: Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Embase, Google Scholar, Medline, PsychInfo, Science Direct, Sociological Abstracts, Proquest, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted. Using the PRISMA flow chart and processes of the United Kingdom Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, we selected and analysed relevant studies. FINDINGS: Four studies that met the inclusion criteria were identified. Studies showed that while the experience of LGBT parents seeking health care was largely positive, strategies need to be implemented to improve the quality of healthcare services for LGBT families and ensure that their needs are met. DISCUSSION: Although many LGBT parents have positive experiences of health care, some still experience discrimination and prejudice. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Specific educational interventions are needed to support LGBT parents seeking health care for their children. CONCLUSIONS: Further research is required to explore LGBT-parented families' experiences of healthcare services, and this should include children's experiences.