2013-10-01 12:00 - Messages

Occupational and genetic risk factors for osteoarthritis: A review

BACKGROUND: Osteoarthritis (OA) is a multifactorial disease with strong genetic and occupational components. Although published studies have described several risk factors for OA, very few studies have investigated the occupational and genetic factors that contribute to this debilitating condition. OBJECTIVE: To describe occupational and genetic factors that may contribute to the risk of developing (OA). METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed using the search terms osteoarthritis, occupation, work, and genetics. RESULTS: Heavy physical work load was the most common occupational risk factor for OA in several anatomical locations. Other factors include kneeling and regular stair climbing, crawling, bending and whole body vibration, and repetitive movements. Numerous studies have also shown the influence of genetic variability in the pathogenesis of OA. Genetic variants of several groups of genes e.g., cartilage extracellular matrix structural genes and the genes related to bone density have been implicated in disease pathogenesis. CONCLUSION: This review shows that occupational factors were extensively studied in knee OA unlike OA of other anatomical regions. Although genetic association studies performed to date identified a number of risk variants, some of these associations have not been consistently replicated across different studies and populations. Therefore, more research is needed.

Source :  Berran Yucesoy, Luenda E. Charles, Brent Baker, Cecil M. Burchfiel. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment and Rehabilitation. http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/WOR-131739
   
http://iospress.metapress.com/content/B584808372U22J22
   

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a web-based and mobile stress-management intervention for employees: design of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Work-related stress is associated with a variety of mental and emotional problems and can lead to substantial economic costs due to lost productivity, absenteeism or the inability to work. There is a considerable amount of evidence on the effectiveness of traditional face-to-face stress-management interventions for employees; however, they are often costly, time-consuming, and characterized by a high access threshold. Web-based interventions may overcome some of these problems yet the evidence in this field is scarce. This paper describes the protocol for a study that will examine the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a web-based guided stress-management training which is based on problem solving and emotion regulation and aimed at reducing stress in adult employees. METHODS: The study will target stressed employees aged 18 and older. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) design will be applied. Based on a power calculation of d=.35 (1-betaof 80%,alpha= .05), 264 participants will be recruited and randomly assigned to either the intervention group or a six-month waitlist control group. Inclusion criteria include an elevated stress level (Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale-10 [greater than or equal to] 22) and current employment. Exclusion criteria include risk of suicide or previously diagnosed psychosis or dissociative symptoms. The primary outcome will be perceived stress, and secondary outcomes include depression and anxiety. Data will be collected at baseline and seven weeks and six months after randomization. An extended follow up at 12 months is planned for the intervention group. Moreover, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted from a societal perspective and will include both direct and indirect health care costs. Data will be analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis and perprotocol. DISCUSSION: The substantial negative consequences of work-related stress emphasize the necessity for effective stress-management trainings. If the proposed internet intervention proves to be (cost-) effective, a preventative, economical stress-management tool will be conceivable. The strengths and limitations of the present study are discussed.

Source : Heber E, Ebert DD, Lehr D, Nobis S, Berking M, Riper H. BMC Public Health 2013; 13(1): 655. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-655

Abonnement courriel

Messages récents

Catégories

Méthodes et types d’études

Mots-Clés (Tags)

Blogoliste

Archives