Little effect of transfer technique instruction and physical fitness training in reducing low back pain among nurses: a cluster randomised intervention study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a transfer technique education programme (TT) alone or in combination with physical fitness training (TTPT) compared with a control group, who followed their usual routine. Eleven clinical hospital wards were cluster randomised to either intervention (six wards) or to control (five wards). The intervention cluster was individually randomised to TT (55 nurses) and TTPT (50 nurses), control (76 nurses). The transfer technique programme was a 4-d course of train-the-trainers to teach transfer technique to their colleagues. The physical training consisted of supervised physical fitness training 1 h twice per week for 8 weeks. Implementing transfer technique alone or in combination with physical fitness training among a hospital nursing staff did not, when compared to a control group, show any statistical differences according to self-reported low back pain (LBP), pain level, disability and sick leave at a 12-month follow-up. However, the individual randomised intervention subgroup (transfer technique/physical training) significantly improved the LBP-disability (p = 0.001). Although weakened by a high withdrawal rate, teaching transfer technique to nurses in a hospital setting needs to be thoroughly considered. Other priorities such as physical training may be taken into consideration. The current study supports the findings of other studies that introducing transfer technique alone has no effect in targeting LBP. However, physical training seems to have an influence in minimising the LBP consequences and may be important in the discussion of how to prevent LBP or the recurrence of LBP among nursing personnel.

Synthesis and glutathione S-transferase structure-affinity relationships of nonpeptide and peptidase-stable glutathione analogues.

A series of nonpeptidic glutathione analogues where the peptide bonds were replaced by simple carbon-carbon bonds or isosteric E double bonds were prepared. The optimal length for the two alkyl chains on either side of the mercaptomethyl group was evaluated using structure-affinity relationships. Affinities of the analogues 14a-f, 23, and 25 were evaluated for a recombinant GST enzyme using a new affinity chromatography method previously developed in our laboratory. Analysis of these analogues gives an additional understanding for GST affinity requirements: (a) the carbon skeleton must conserve that of glutathione since analogue 14a showed the best affinity (IC50 = 5.2 microM); (b) the GST G site is not able to accommodate a chain length elongation of one methylene group (no affinity for analogues 14c,f); (c) a one-methylene group chain length reduction is tolerated, much more for the "Glu side" (14d, IC50 = 10.1 microM) than for the "Gly side" (14b, IC50 = 1800 microM); (d) the mercaptomethyl group must remain at position 5 as shown from the null affinity of the 6-mercaptomethyl analogue 14e; (e) the additional peptide isosteric E double bond (25) or hydroxyl derivative (23) in 14e did not help to retrieve affinity. This work reveals useful information for the design of new selective nonpeptidic and peptidase-stable glutathione analogues.