Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 579–588 | Cite as

Adoption of Preventive Measures After Returning to Work Among Workers Affected by De Quervain’s Tenosynovitis

  • Beatriz Calvo-Cerrada
  • José Miguel Martínez
  • Antonio Dalmau


Objectives To determine whether if there was any increase in preventive measures adopted following reincorporation to their jobs among workers affected by De Quervain’s tenosynovitis (DQT), who were treated by surgical intervention. Methods Study subjects where those workers, members of a mutual health insurance scheme, who were operated on between June 2006 and June 2009 (n=52). For each worker we checked whether preventive measures had been taken in their workplace, both before their episode, and following reincorporation. The difference in proportions (DP) was calculated between the proportion of individuals with preventive measures after reincorporation and the proportion with preventive measures implemented prior to their surgical intervention, both globally and in terms of sociodemographic, occupational, and clinical variables. Results The proportion of workers with preventive measures adopted following reincorporation to their job was higher than the proportion with preventive measures prior to their surgical intervention (DP = 23.1 %; 95 %CI: 6.4–39.7 %). The risk factors associated with the greatest change in preventive measures were repetitive movements (DP = 25.6 %; 95 %CI: 6.1–45.1 %) and awkward postures (DP = 40 %; 95 %CI: −22.9 to 100 %). Conclusions Despite the increased proportion of workers with preventive measures implemented in their workplace following reincorporation to the job, there is a lack of information and of adoption of ergonomic preventive measures specific to this pathology. Implementation of ergonomic programs could reduce incidence of musculoskeletal disorders such as DQT, and would thus increase productivity, efficiency and worker satisfaction, while diminishing sick leave episodes, and the associated costs and relapses.


De Quervain’s tenosynovitis Musculoskeletal disorder Preventive intervention Return to work 



Thanks to ASEPEYO for providing the data and permission to analyze them. Thanks also to the workers for their disinterested participation in the interests of science. Finally, thanks to my colleagues for their advice during the elaboration of this project: to Consol Serra, Fernando G. Benavides and Jordi Delclós (UPF); to Oriol Fàbrega (USL Costa de Ponent); to Ramón Vila, Pilar Bel, Meri Vila, Raúl Franco and MªTeresa Llorens (ASEPEYO). The authors also thank Dave Macfarlane for the English translation and his comments.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    De Quervain F. Concerning a form of chronic tenovaginits. Bl Schweiz Arz 1895;25:389–94.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moore G. Hand and wrist tendinitis. In: Bruce PB, editor. Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors. A critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health 1997. p. 1–31.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Seyan H, Kopp J, Horch R. De Quervain’s stenosing tendovaginitis, one of the most common conditions affecting the hand. MMW Fortschr Med. 2006;39:33–5.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scheller A, Schuh R, Hönle W. Long-term results of surgical release of de Quervain’s stenosing tenosynovitis. Int Orthop. 2009;33(5):1301–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rivas Recio JR, Sesé M, Madrazo C. Study of permanent disability. Valencia: 2002–2005. Health and Safety at Work. 2006;52:4–42.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Balwin ML. Reducing the costs of work-related musculoskeletal disorders: targeting strategies to chronic disability cases. J Electromyograp Kinesiol. 2004;14:33–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buckle P. Ergonomics and musculoskeletal disorders: overview. Occup Med. 2005;55:164–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De la Parra-Márquez ML, Tamez-Cavazos R, Zertuche-Cedillo L. Risk factors associated with stenosing tenosynovitis. Case-control study. Cir Ciruj. 2008;76:323–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Peters-Veluthamaningal C, Van derWindt DW, Meyboom JB. Corticosteroid injection for de Quervain’s tenosynovitis in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009;3:Art.No.:CD005616. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005616.pub2.
  10. 10.
    Walker-Bone K, Palmer KT, Reading I, et al. Prevalence and impact of musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb in the general population. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;51:642–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wolf JM, Sturdivant RX, Owens BD. Incidence of de Quervain’s tenosynovitis in a young, active population. J Hand Surg (Am). 2009;34:112–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yuen A, Coombs CJ. Abductor pollicis longus tendon rupture in De Quervain’s disease. J Hand Surg. 2006;31:72–5.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Piedrahita H. Epidemiological evidence between risk factors at work and musculoskeletal disorders. Mapfre Medicina. 2004;15:62–71.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Turhan N, Amat C, Akyüz M, et al. Ergonomic risk factors for cumulative trauma disorders in VDU operators. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2008;14:417–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Simmer-Beck M, Bray KK, Branson B, et al. Comparison of muscle activity associated with structural differences in dental hygiene mirrors. J Dent Hyg. 2006;1:8–18.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Douglas H, Chin MD, Neil FJ. Repetitive motion hand disorders. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2002;30:2–8.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mckenzie Fred, Storment John, Van Hook Pattie, et al. A program for control of repetitive trauma disorders associated with hand tool operations in a telecommunications manufacturing facility. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1985;46:674–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turner JA, Franklin G, Fulton-Kehoe D, et al. Prediction of chronic disability in work-related musculoskeletal disorders: a prospective, population-based study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2004;5:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Franche RL, Cullen K, Clarke J, et al. Work-place based return to work interventions: a systematic review of a quantitative literature. J Occu Rehabil. 2005;15:607–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, et al. Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon. 2008;39:342–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rempel DM, Krause N, Goldberg R, et al. A randomized controlled trial evaluating the effects of two workstation interventions on upper body pain and incident musculoskeletal disorders among computer operators. Occup Environ Med. 2006;63:300–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Palmer KT, Harris EC, Coggon D. Compensating occupationally related tenosynovitis and epicondilitis: a literature review. Occup Med. 2007;57:67–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Veito TH, Hysing M, Eriksen HR. Low back pain interventions at the workplace: a systematic literature review. Occup Med. 2004;54:3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    SPSS 9.0 Windows. SPSS, Inc, Chicago, Illinois, 1999.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stata Corp. Statistical Software: Release 10.1. College Station, Texas: Stata Corp MP, 2009Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Arroyo J, Delgado PJ, Fuentes A, et al. Surgical treatment of De Quervain's stenosing tenovaginitis. Locomotor Pathology. 2007;5:88–93.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barbieri PG, Colombini D, Occhipinti E, et al. Epidemics of musculotendinous pathologies of the upper limbs (cumulative trauma disorders) in a Group of assembly line workers. Tuela Salute Loughi di Lavoro. 1993;84:487–500.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jamjumrus N, Nanthavanij S. Ergonomic intervention for improving work postures during notebook computer operation. J Hum Ergol. 2008;37:23–33.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jones T, Kumar S. Comparison of ergonomic risk assessment output in a repetitive sawmill occupation: trim-saw operator. Work. 2008;31:367–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Goyal N, Jain N, Rachapalli V. Ergonomics in radiology. Clin Radiol. 2009;64:119–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chamblás-Sáez LA, Valgas-Valdés JP. Ergonomic study in crosscut and finger-joint in a lumbery company. Science and Work. 2005;18:140–7.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pehkonen I, Takala EP, Ketola R, et al. Evaluation of participatory ergonomic intervention process in kitchen work. Appl Ergon. 2009;40:115–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hagberg M, Silverstein B, Wells R, et al. Work related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMDs): a reference book for prevention. London: Taylor & Francis; 1995.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Marras WS, Cutlip RG, Burt SE, et al. National occupational research agenda (NORA) future directions in occupational musculoeskeletal disorder health research. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(1):15–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    García AM, Gadea R, Sevilla MJ, et al. Participatory ergonomics: a model for the prevention of occupational musculoskeletal disorders. Rev Esp Public Health. 2009;83:509–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beatriz Calvo-Cerrada
    • 1
    • 2
  • José Miguel Martínez
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
  • Antonio Dalmau
    • 2
  1. 1.Unidad Docente de Medicina del Trabajo “Mateu Orfila”Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)BarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Mutua de Accidentes de trabajo y Enfermedades Profesionales de la Seguridad Social ASEPEYOSant Cugat del Vallès, BarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Centro de Investigación en Salud Laboral (CISAL)Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)BarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Grupo de investigación en desigualdades en Salud (GREDS-EMCONET)Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF)BarcelonaSpain
  5. 5.Ciber de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)EspañaSpain

Personalised recommendations