Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 220–234 | Cite as

A Systematic Review of Workplace Ergonomic Interventions with Economic Analyses

  • Emile TompaEmail author
  • Roman Dolinschi
  • Claire de Oliveira
  • Benjamin C. AmickIII
  • Emma Irvin


Introduction This article reports on a systematic review of workplace ergonomic interventions with economic evaluations. The review sought to answer the question: “what is the credible evidence that incremental investment in ergonomic interventions is worth undertaking?” Past efforts to synthesize evidence from this literature have focused on effectiveness, whereas this study synthesizes evidence on the cost-effectiveness/financial merits of such interventions. Methods Through a structured journal database search, 35 intervention studies were identified in nine industrial sectors. A qualitative synthesis approach, known as best evidence synthesis, was used rather than a quantitative approach because of the diversity of study designs and statistical analyses found across studies. Evidence on the financial merits of interventions was synthesized by industrial sector. Results In the manufacturing and warehousing sector strong evidence was found in support of the financial merits of ergonomic interventions from a firm perspective. In the administrative support and health care sectors moderate evidence was found, in the transportation sector limited evidence, and in remaining sectors insufficient evidence. Conclusions Most intervention studies focus on effectiveness. Few consider their financial merits. Amongst the few that do, several had exemplary economic analyses, although more than half of the studies had low quality economic analyses. This may be due to the low priority given to economic analysis in this literature. Often only a small part of the overall evaluation of many studies focused on evaluating their cost-effectiveness.


Economic evaluation Ergonomics Systematic review 


  1. 1.
    Amick BC III, Brewer S, Tullar J, Van Eerd D, Cole DC, Tompa E. Musculoskeletal disorders: examining best practices for prevention. Prof Saf. 2009;54(3):24–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, et al. Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon. 2008;39(3):342–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brewer S, Eerd DV, Amick IB III, Irvin E, Daum KM, Gerr F, et al. Workplace interventions to prevent musculoskeletal and visual symptoms and disorders among computer users: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(3):325–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Slavin RE. Best-evidence synthesis: an alternative to meta-analytic and traditional reviews. Educ Res. 1986;15(9):5–11.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Slavin RE. Best evidence synthesis: an intelligent alternative to meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48(1):9–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tompa E, Dolinschi R, de Oliveira C, Irvin E. A systematic review of OHS interventions with economic evaluations. Toronto: Institute for Work & Health; 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, Irvin E, Sinclair S, Frank J. Workplace-based return-to-work interventions: a systematic review of the quantitative literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(4):607–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tompa E, Dolinschi R, de Oliveira C. Practice and potential of economic evaluation of workplace-based interventions for occupational health and safety. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(3):367–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tompa E, Culyer AJ, Dolinschi R. Economic evaluation of interventions for occupational health and safety: developing good practice. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rempel DM, Krause N, Goldberg R, Benner D, Hudes M, Goldner GU. A randomised controlled trial evaluating the effects of two workstation interventions on upper body pain and incident musculoskeletal disorders among computer operators. Occup Environ Med. 2006;63(5):300–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tompa E, de Oliveira C, Dolinschi R, Irvin E. A systematic review of disability management interventions with economic evaluations. J Occup Rehabil. 2008;18(1):16–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    DeRango K, Amick BC, Robertson MM, Rooney T, Moore A, Bazzani L. The productivity consequences of two ergonomic interventions. Toronto: Institute for Work & Health; 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lahiri S, Gold J, Levenstein C. Estimation of net-costs for prevention of occupational low back pain: three case studies from the US. Am J Ind Med. 2005;48(6):530–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chhokar R, Engst C, Miller A, Robinson D, Tate RB, Yassi A. The three-year economic benefits of a ceiling lift intervention aimed to reduce healthcare worker injuries. Appl Ergon. 2005;36(2):223–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Collins JW, Wolf L, Bell J, Evanoff B. An evaluation of a “best practices” musculoskeletal injury prevention program in nursing homes. Inj Prev. 2004;10(4):206–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Evanoff BA, Bohr PC, Wolf LD. Effects of a participatory ergonomics team among hospital orderlies. Am J Ind Med. 1999;35(4):358–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lanoie P, Tavenas S. Costs and benefits of preventing workplace accidents: the case of participatory ergonomics. Saf Sci. 1997;24(3):181–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Abrahamsson L. Production economics analysis of investment initiated to improve working environment. Appl Ergon. 2000;31(1):1–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Halpern CA, Dawson KP. Design and implementation of a participatory ergonomics program for machine sewing tasks. Int J Ind Ergo. 1997;20(6):429–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Daltroy LH, Iversen MD, Larson MG, Lew R, Wright E, Ryan J, et al. A controlled trial of an educational program to prevent low back injuries. N Eng J Med. 1997;337(5):322–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Versloot JM, Rozeman A, van Son AM, van Akkerveeken PF. The cost-effectiveness of a back school program in industry: a longitudinal controlled field study. Spine. 1992;17(1):22–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tuchin P, Pollard H. The cost-effectiveness of spinal care education as a preventive strategy for spinal injury. J Occup Health Safety—Aust NZ. 1998;14(1):43–51.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    DeRango K, Franzini L. Economic evaluations of workplace health interventions: theory and literature review. In: Quick JC, Tetrick LE, editors. Handbook of occupational psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2003. p. 417–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goossens ME, Evers SM, Vlaeyen JW, Rutten-Van Molken MP, Van der Linden SM. Principles of economic evaluation for interventions of chronic musculoskeletal pain. Eur J Pain. 1999;3(4):343–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Niven KJ. A review of the application of health economics to health and safety in healthcare. Health Policy. 2002;61(3):291–304.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hocking B. Evaluation of a manual handling project. J Occup Health Safety—Aust NZ. 1991;7(4):295–301.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Banco L, Lapidus G, Monopoli J, Zavoski R. The safe teen work project: a study to reduce cutting injuries among young and inexperienced workers. Am J Ind Med. 1997;31(5):619–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shannon HS, Lowe GS. How many injured workers do not file claims for workers’ compensation benefits? Am J Ind Med. 2002;42(6):467–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Haddix AC, Teutsch SM, Corso PS. Prevention effectiveness: a guide to decision analysis and economic evaluation. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emile Tompa
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Roman Dolinschi
    • 1
  • Claire de Oliveira
    • 1
  • Benjamin C. AmickIII
    • 1
    • 4
  • Emma Irvin
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Work & HealthTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsMcMaster UniversityHamiltonCanada
  3. 3.Dalla Lana School of Public HealthUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  4. 4.School of Public HealthUniversity of Texas Health Science CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations