4.4 Article

Prevention and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal disorders in oral health care professionals A systematic review

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION
Volume 150, Issue 6, Pages 489-502

Publisher

AMER DENTAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1016/j.adaj.2019.01.031

Keywords

Ergonomics; injury prevention; musculoskeletal disorders; dentists; dental hygienists

Funding

  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [R01-OH010665]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background. The authors' objective in this systematic review was to describe the evidence for preventive and rehabilitative interventions for musculoskeletal disorders in oral health care. Types of Studies Reviewed. The authors conducted systematic search, screening, and eligibility processes to identify experimental, quasiexperimental, observational, and survey research studies in which the investigators either directly evaluated or predicted the effects of preventive or rehabilitative interventions on the reduction of musculoskeletal symptoms in oral health care professionals. Results. The authors identified and screened 3,571 unique abstracts, assessed 256 full-text articles for eligibility, and included 34 articles in the review. Investigators in 17 experimental studies described the results of preventive or rehabilitation interventions and in 17 survey research studies predicted or correlated preventive or protective techniques to a reduction in musculoskeletal symptoms. The primary techniques evaluated in the studies included equipment modification, ergonomic training, and physical exercise. Conclusions and Practical Implications. The evidence suggests that magnification loupes and indirect-vision techniques have a positive effect on the reduction of musculoskeletal symptoms. In terms of evaluating intervention efficacy, other techniques have mixed evidence or are limited by low-level study design.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available