European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 96, Issue 2, pp 110–121

Neuromuscular assessment in elderly workers with and without work related shoulder/neck trouble: the NEW-study design and physiological findings

  • G. Sjøgaard
  • K. Søgaard
  • H. J. Hermens
  • L. Sandsjö
  • T. Läubli
  • S. Thorn
  • M. M. R. Vollenbroek-Hutten
  • L. Sell
  • H. Christensen
  • A. Klipstein
  • R. Kadefors
  • R. Merletti
Original Article

Abstract

Musculoskeletal disorders in the neck and shoulder area are a major occupational concern in the European countries especially among elderly females. The aim was to assess these disorders based on quantitative EMG indicators and functional tests. 252 female computer users (45–68 years) were recruited from four European countries in two contrast groups: (1) 88 neck/shoulder (NS) cases reporting trouble in the neck and/or shoulder region for more than 30 days during the last year, and (2) 164 NS-controls reporting such trouble for no more than 7 days. Questionnaires, functional/clinical tests, and physiological recordings were performed in workplace related field studies. The results showed no differences in anthropometrics but NS-cases reported more strained head positions and more eye problems than controls. The psychosocial working factors were similar, although, NS-controls had slightly better scores on working conditions, general health, and vitality compared to cases. The NS-cases had lower maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) during shoulder elevation (mean (SD) 310 (122) N) compared to the controls (364 (122) N). During 30% MVC electromyography (EMGrms) in the trapezius muscle was lower in NS-cases (194 (105) μV) than in controls (256 (169) μV), while no differences were found regarding endurance time. Estimated conduction velocity was not different between NS-cases and -controls. Four functional computer tests were performed equally well by NS-cases and -controls, and the corresponding EMG variables also did not differ. A major finding in this large-scale epidemiological study is the significantly lower MVC in NS-cases compared with NS-controls together with lower EMGrms value at 30% MVC, while computer tasks were performed at similar relative muscle activation. The study was unable to reveal quantitative EMG indicators and functional tests that could objectively assess disorders in NS-cases.

Keywords

Maximal voluntary contraction Computer users Electromyography Psychosocial factors Functional tests 

References

  1. Aarås A, Horgen G, Bjørset H-H, Ro O, Thoresen M (1998) Musculoskeletal, visual and psychosocial stress in VDU operators before and after multidisciplinary ergonomic interventions. Appl Ergon 29:335–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aarås A, Horgen G, Bjørset H-H, Ro O, Walsøe H (2001) Musculoskeletal, visual and psychosocial stress in VDU operators before and after multidisciplinary ergonomic interventions. A 6 years prospective study—Part II. Appl Ergon 32:559–571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bäckman E, Johansson V, Häger B, Sjöblom P, Henriksson KG (1995) Isometric muscle strength and muscular endurance in normal persons aged between 17 and 70 years. Scand J Rehabil Med 27:109–117PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Birch L, Juul-Kristensen B, Jensen C, Finsen L, Christensen H (2000) Acute response to precision, time pressure and mental demand during simulated computer work. Scand J Work Environ Health 26:299–305PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Blangsted AK, Søgaard K, Christensen H, Sjøgaard G (2004) The effect of physical and psychosocial loads on the trapezius muscle activity during computer keying tasks and rest periods. Eur J Appl Physiol 91:253–258CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Blatter BM, Bongers PM (2002) Duration of computer use and mouse use in relation to musculoskeletal disorders of neck or upper limb. Int J Ind Ergon 30:295–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borg G (1990) Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. Scand J Work Environ Health 16(suppl 1):55–58PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Buckle PW, Devereux JJ (2002) The nature of work-related neck and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. Appl Ergon 33:207–217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Burr H (2000) Occupational computer use in Denmark 1999 (in danish) National Institute of Occupational Health, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  10. Ekman A, Andersson A, Hagberg M, Hjelm EW (2000) Gender differences in musculoskeletal health of computer and mouse users in the Swedish workforce. Occup Med (Lond) 50:608–613Google Scholar
  11. Essendrop M, Schibye B, Hansen K (2001) Reliability of isometric muscle strength tests for the trunk, hands and shoulders. Int J Ind Ergon 28:379–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Farina D, Muhammad W, Fortunato E, Meste O, Merletti R, Rix H (2001) Estimation of single motor unit conduction velocity from myoelectric signals detected with linear electrode arrays. Med Biol Eng Comput 39:225–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Farina D, Madeleine P, Graven-Nielsen T, Merletti R, Arendt-Nielsen L (2002) Standardising surface electromyogram recordings for assessment of actvity and fatigue in the human upper trapezius muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol 86:469–478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Farina D, Kallenberg LA, Merletti R, Hermens HJ (2003) Effect of side dominance on myoelectric manifestations of muscle fatigue in the human upper trapezius muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol 90:480–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Farina D, Zennaro D, Pozzo M, Merletti R, Läubli T (2005) Single motor unit and spectral surface EMG analysis during low-force, sustained contractions of the upper trapezius muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol (this issue)Google Scholar
  16. Frankenhaeuser M, Johansson G (1976) Task demand as reflected in catecholamine excretion and heart rate. J Human Stress 2:15–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Hägg GM (1993) Action potential velocity measurements in the upper trapezius muscle. J Electromyogra Kinesiol 3:231–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hansson G-Å, Strömberg U, Larsson B, Ohlsson K, Balogh I, Moritz U (1992) Electromyographic fatigue in neck/shoulder muscles and endurance in women with repetitive work. Ergonomics 35:1341–1352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ilmarinen J, Tuomi K, Klockars M (1997) Changes in the work ability of active employees over an 11-year period. Scan J Work Environ Health 23(Suppl 1):49–57Google Scholar
  20. Jensen BR, Schibye B, Søgaard K, Simonsen EB, Sjøgaard G (1993a) Shoulder muscle load and muscle fatigue among industrial sewing- machine operators. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 67:467–475CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jensen C, Vasseljen O, Westgaard RH (1993b) The influence of electrode position on bipolar surface electromyogram recordings of the upper trapezius muscle. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 67:266–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Jensen C, Finsen L, Søgaard K, Christensen H (2002) Musculoskeletal symptoms and duration of computer and mouse use. Int J Ind Ergon 30:265–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johansson H, Sojka P (1991) Pathophysiological mechanisms involved in genesis and spread of muscular tension in occupational muscle pain and in chronic musculoskeletal pain syndromes: a hypothesis. Med Hypotheses 35:196–203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Johansson H, Windhorst U, Djupsjöbacka M, Passatore M (2003) Chronic work-related myalgia, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Gävle, Umeå, Sweden, pp 1–310Google Scholar
  25. Juul-Kristensen B, Kadefors R, Hansen K, Byström P, Sandsjö L, Sjøgaard G (2005) Clinical signs and physical function in neck and upper extremities among elderly female computer users: the NEW-study. Eur J Appl Physiol (this issue)Google Scholar
  26. Karlqvist L (1997) Assessment of physical work load at visual display unit workstations. Ergonomic applications and gender aspects. Arbete och Hälsa 9:1–66Google Scholar
  27. Karlqvist L, Wigaeus Tornqvist E, Hagberg M, Hagman M, Toomingas A (2003) Self-reported working conditions of VDU operators and associations with musculoskeletal symptoms: a cross-sectional study focussing on gender differences. Int J Ind Ergon 30:277–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kristensen TS, Borg V, Hannerz H (2002) Socioeconomic status and psychosocial work environment: results from a Danish national study. Scand J Public Health (Suppl 59):41–48Google Scholar
  29. Kuorinka I, Jonsson B, Kilbom Å, Vinterberg H, Biering-Sørensen F, Andersson G, Jørgensen K (1987) Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon 18:233–237CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lange F, Van Weerden TW, Van der Hoeven JH (2002) A new surface electromyography analysis method to determine spread of muscle fiber conduction velosities. J Appl Physiol 93:759–764PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Larsman P, Sandsjö L, Klipstein A, Vollenbroek-Hutten M, Christensen H (2005) Perceived work demands, felt stress, and musculoskeletal neck/shoulder symptoms among elderly female computer users. The NEW-study. Eur J Appl Physiol (this issue)Google Scholar
  32. Larsson B, Björk J, Henriksson K-G, Gerdle B, Lindman R (2000) The prevalences of cytochrome c oxidase negative and superpositive fibres and ragged-red fibres in the trapezius muscle of female cleaners with and without myalgia and of female healthy controls. Pain 84:379–387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Laursen B, Jensen BR, Garde AH, Jørgensen AH (2002) Effect of mental and physical demands on muscular activity during the use of a computer mouse and a keyboard. Scand J Work Environ Health 28:215–221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Li W, Sakamoto K (1996) Distribution of muscle fiber conduction velocity of biceps brachii during voluntary isometric contraction with use of surface array electrodes. Appl Human Sci 15:41–53CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Lie I, Watten RG (1994) VDT work, oculomotor strain, and subjective complaints: an experimental and clinical study. Ergonomics 37:1419–1433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lund JP, Donga R, Widmer CG, Stohler CS (1991) The pain-adaptation model: a discussion of the relationship between chronic musculoskeletal pain and motor activity. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 69:683–694PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Marras WS (2004) State-of-the-art research perspectives on musculoskeletal disorder causation and control: the need for an intergraded understanding of risk. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 14:1–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mathiassen SE (1993) Variation in shoulder-neck activity. Physiological, psychophysical and methodological studies of isometric exercise and light assembly work. Arbete och Hälsa 7:1–106Google Scholar
  39. Merletti R, Farina D, Gazzoni M (2003) The linear electrode array: a useful tool with many applications. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 13:37–47CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Ohlsson K, Attewell RG, Johnsson B, Ahlm A, Skerfving S (1994) An assessment of neck and upper extremity disorders by questionnaire and clinical examination. Ergonomics 37:891–897PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Palmerud G, Kadefors R, Sporrong H, Järvholm U, Herberts P, Högfors C, Peterson B (1995) Voluntary redistribution of muscle activity in human shoulder muscles. Ergonomics 38:806–815PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Pozzo M, Bottin A, Ferrabone R, Merletti R (2004) Sixty-four channel wearable acquisition system for long-term surface electromyogram recording with electrode arrays. Med Biol Eng Comput 42:455–466PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Punnett L, Bergqvist U (1997) National Institute for Working Life—ergonomic expert committee document no 1. Visual display unit work and upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. A review of epidemiological findings. National Institute for Working Life, Solna, pp 1–161Google Scholar
  44. Ranney D, Wells R, Moore A (1995) Upper limb musculoskeletal disorders in highly repetitive industries: precise anatomical physical findings. Ergonomics 38:1408–1423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rohmert W (1960) Ermittlung von erholungspausen für statische arbeit des menschen. Int Z Angew Physiol Arbeitsphysiol 18:123–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schulte E, Kallenberg LA, Christensen H, Disselhorst-Klug C, Hermens H, Rau G, Søgaard K (2005) Comparison of the electromyographic activity in the upper trapezius and biceps brachii muscle in subjects with muscular disorders: a pilot study. Eur J Appl Physiol (this issue)Google Scholar
  47. Sillanpaa J, Huikko S, Nyberg M, Kivi P, Laippala P, Uitti J (2003) Effect of work with visual display units on musculo-skeletal disorders in the office environment. Occup Med (Lond) 53:443–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sjøgaard G, Lundberg U, Kadefors R (2000) The role of muscle activity and mental load in the development of pain and degenerative processes at the muscle cell level during computer work. Euro J Appl Physiol 83:99–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Søgaard K, Fallentin N, Nielsen J (1996) Work load during floor cleaning. The effect of cleaning methods and work technique. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 73:73–81CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Steingrímsdóttir OA, Knardahl S, Vøllestad NK (2004) Prospective study of the relationship between musculoskeletal and psychological complaints and electromyographic activity during isometric muscular contractions in a working population. Scand J Work Environ Health 30:410–420PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Treaster DE, Burr D (2004) Gender differences in prevalence of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. Ergonomics 47:495–526CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Viikari-Juntura E (1983) Neck and upper limb disorders among slaughterhouse workers. An epidemiologic and clinical study. Scand J Work Environ Health 9:283–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Wahlström J, Svensson J, Hagberg M, Johnson PW (2000) Differences between work methods and gender in computer mouse use. Scand J Work Environ Health 25:390–397Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Sjøgaard
    • 1
  • K. Søgaard
    • 1
  • H. J. Hermens
    • 2
  • L. Sandsjö
    • 3
  • T. Läubli
    • 4
  • S. Thorn
    • 3
  • M. M. R. Vollenbroek-Hutten
    • 2
  • L. Sell
    • 1
  • H. Christensen
    • 1
  • A. Klipstein
    • 4
  • R. Kadefors
    • 3
  • R. Merletti
    • 5
  1. 1.National Institute of Occupational HealthCopenhagen ØDenmark
  2. 2.RRDEnschedeThe Netherlands
  3. 3.National Institute for Working LifeGoteborgSweden
  4. 4.ETHZurichSwitzerland
  5. 5.LISiNPolitecnico di TorinoTorinoItaly

Personalised recommendations