Cochrane · systematic review · CD012886
Work‐break schedules for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in healthy workers
Luger, T, Maher, CG, Rieger, MA, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
WorkAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
8
current version
GRADE rated
8
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 5 · 62.5%Low 3 · 37.5%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Additional work breaks compared to no additional work breaks for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in workers
Population: office workers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Participant‐reported musculoskeletal pain, discomfort or fatigue Method: 0‐100 mm VAS or 1‐5 NRS Additional work breaks vs no additional work breaks | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 225 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Productivity or work performance Method: total number of documents entered per day, or keystrokes per hour, or WRFQ Additional work breaks vs no additional work breaks | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 225 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, indirectness |
Additional work breaks compared to work breaks as needed for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in workers
Population: office workers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Participant‐reported musculoskeletal pain, discomfort or fatigue Method: 0‐100 mm VAS Additional work breaks vs work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 15 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Productivity or work performance Method: number of words typed per 3 hours Additional work breaks vs work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 15 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Additional higher frequency work breaks compared to additional lower frequency work breaks for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in workers
Population: office workers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Participant‐reported musculoskeletal pain, discomfort or fatigue Method: 0‐100 mm VAS Additional higher frequency work breaks vs additional lower frequency work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 10 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Productivity or work performance Method: number of words typed per 3 hours Additional higher frequency work breaks vs additional lower frequency work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 10 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Active work breaks compared to passive work breaks for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in workers
Population: office workers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Participant‐reported musculoskeletal pain, discomfort or fatigue Method: 1‐7 NRS Active work breaks vs passive work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 153 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Relaxation work breaks compared to physical work breaks for preventing musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders in workers
Population: office workers
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Participant‐reported musculoskeletal pain ,discomfort or fatigue Method: 1‐7 NRS Relaxation work breaks vs physical work breaks | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 97 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |