https://doi.org/10.5812/healthscope-148901

Work-Related Muscluskeletal Disorders and Work Ability Among Hospital Employees in Southeast of Iran

authors:

avatar Hassan Okati-Aliabad ORCID 1 , avatar Raheleh Hashemi Habybabady 2 , *

Department of Public Health, Health Promotion Research Center, School of Health, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran
Health Promotion Research Center, School of Health, Zahedan University of Medical Sciences, Zahedan, Iran
Health Scope: Vol.13, issue 4; e148901
published online: November 16, 2024
article type: Research Article
received: June 1, 2024
revised: October 4, 2024
accepted: October 13, 2024

How To Cite Okati-Aliabad H, Hashemi Habybabady R. Work-Related Muscluskeletal Disorders and Work Ability Among Hospital Employees in Southeast of Iran. Health Scope. 2024;13(4):e148901. https://doi.org/10.5812/healthscope-148901.

Abstract

Background:

The Work Ability Index (WAI) evaluates how well workers cope with the physical and mental demands of their jobs.

Objectives:

This study aims to explore how demographic factors and work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) influence work ability among employees at the largest specialized hospital in southeast Iran.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study was conducted at the largest specialized hospital in Zahedan. A sample of 194 clinical staff and support personnel, including nurses, nursing assistants, patient transporters, and cleaning staff, were randomly selected through a stratified random sampling method. Work ability and musculoskeletal discomfort were assessed using the Persian versions of the WAI and Cornell Questionnaires. Quantitative data were presented as mean ± SD, while qualitative data were expressed as numbers and percentages. Pearson correlation, Kruskal-Wallis, Mann-Whitney U, and one- and multi-factor General Linear Models were used for data analysis in SPSS version 19.

Results:

Work ability decreased with age (P < 0.001). Significant associations were found between work ability and age, job category, education, and Body Mass Index (BMI) (P < 0.05). After adjusting for age, job, education, and BMI, lower back pain (P = 0.002), thigh pain (P = 0.004), and knee pain (P = 0.026) were significantly linked to work ability. There was a notable negative correlation between work ability and discomfort score (r = -0.337, P < 0.001), with nursing assistants reporting higher discomfort scores compared to nurses, cleaning staff, and patient transporters (P < 0.05).

Conclusions:

Our findings suggest a potential link between musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and work ability. Therefore, it is recommended to implement a program focused on identifying and addressing the risk factors associated with MSDs.

1. Background

The concept of "work ability" refers to an individual's mental and physical condition, as well as their capacity to perform assigned tasks. Key factors influencing work ability include job demands, lifestyle, health, and personal attributes, all of which are essential in enhancing workforce participation and effectiveness (1).

Several quantitative and qualitative models have been proposed to assess employees' work ability. Common indicators used in these assessments include heart rate variations, maximum oxygen consumption, and the Work Ability Index (WAI) (2, 3).

The WAI assesses and estimates an individual's capacity to perform their job. Developed in Finland, it reflects the balance between employees' perception of job demands and their ability and resources to meet those demands (4).

Research indicates that an increase in musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) leads to a reduction in work capacity (5, 6). Additionally, experiencing musculoskeletal pain in multiple areas can significantly impair job performance (7). Thus, improving work capacity requires addressing both psychological factors and MSDs (8).

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) are a major contributor to workplace injuries, resulting in higher costs, lost workdays, and increased absenteeism (9). Various body parts, including the neck, shoulders, arms, wrists, and back, can be affected by these disorders, with back pain being the most common (10).

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders account for one-third of work-related illnesses and injuries, and half of all absenteeism cases are attributed to these conditions (11, 12). For 60% of workers in the European Union facing occupational challenges, MSDs are the most significant work-related issue (12).

In healthcare environments, physical injuries, particularly MSDs, are common due to occupational hazards such as extended periods of standing, poor posture, patient handling, and psychological stress (13, 14). Nurses, in particular, face a heightened risk of back problems due to frequent patient handling tasks (15). Factors contributing to the high prevalence of MSDs in nursing include insufficient training, outdated patient handling techniques, and a lack of awareness about proper transfer assistance among nursing staff (16).

Several personal factors, including age, education level, work experience, BMI, physical activity, workplace conditions, and financial status, play significant roles in determining an individual’s work ability and influencing their WAI (17-20).

Hospitals play a crucial role in community health, making the well-being of all staff essential for providing effective care and supporting societal welfare.

2. Objectives

Given that MSDs can reduce work ability, leading to increased absenteeism, disability, and early retirement, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between work ability and MSDs among employees at the largest specialized hospital in southeastern Iran.

3. Methods

This study was conducted in 2017 at Ali-ibn Abi Talib Hospital, the largest specialized hospital in southeastern Iran. This hospital is affiliated with Zahedan University of Medical Sciences and is recognized as a leading provincial tertiary teaching hospital, serving as a referral center for other tertiary hospitals in Sistan and Balochestan. A sample of 194 clinical and support staff, including nurses, nursing assistants, patient transporters, and cleaning staff, was randomly selected through a stratified random sampling method.

Participants with pre-existing musculoskeletal diseases, those on sick leave, and individuals who missed any data collection periods were excluded from the study. The WAI Questionnaire, administered according to the standard methodology recommended by the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health (17-20), was used to evaluate participants' perceived job capacity. A study conducted in Iran demonstrated that the Persian version of the WAI questionnaire has strong psychometric properties, including good internal consistency and reliability in test-retest evaluations, with a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.78 (21).

The WAI questionnaire comprises two sections: (1) demographics and (2) seven items. Scores range from 7 to 49, categorized as follows: 7 - 27 (poor), 28 - 36 (moderate), 37 - 43 (good), and 44 - 49 (outstanding). A score of 36 or lower indicates "low work ability," while a score of 37 or higher indicates "satisfactory work ability" (21). The WAI is a self-administered tool that assesses health status, resources, and work demands. It was noted that the distribution of participants across WAI categories and the average WAI score remained consistent over a four-week period (22).

Like many tools, the WAI has several limitations:

(1) The full WAI can be too lengthy for practical use in many settings, especially in large studies that require efficient data collection.

(2) Privacy concerns arise because many employees may be hesitant to disclose their medical information when completing the WAI.

(3) The WAI lacks specificity in providing guidance on where and how to intervene when low scores are observed, whether at the individual or group level (23, 24).

The Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ) was used to evaluate MSDs. Derived from the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire and the Cornell Hand Discomfort Questionnaire, the CMDQ assesses pain and discomfort across 11 body areas (25). It is widely used among ergonomics professionals and has been translated into Persian for various workplace applications in Iran (26).

The validity of the CMDQ in Iran has been confirmed, with its reliability established using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (0.986) (25). This method is generally simple to implement, requiring only a small team of trained personnel and a brief period for completion. Additionally, it is cost-effective. However, it has limitations, such as the potential for biased or one-sided responses influenced by workers' perspectives (27).

Participants provided informed consent before completing the questionnaires. The study received ethical approval from the Ethical Committee of Zahedan University of Medical Sciences.

Quantitative variables were expressed as mean ± SD, while qualitative variables were presented as number (%). Pearson correlation was used to assess the relationship between work ability and discomfort scores. Additionally, the Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were applied to compare discomfort scores across different occupational groups. A univariate General Linear Model was employed for both one-factor and multi-factor analyses to explore the relationship between work ability, demographic factors, and musculoskeletal disorders. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 19.

4. Results

A total of 194 hospital personnel, including nurses (49%), nursing assistants (9.3%), patient transfer staff (10.3%), and hospital cleaners (31.4%), were studied. The mean job experience was 8.75 ± 7.37 years, and the mean age was 34.37 ± 8.78 years. The majority of participants were female (67.5%), with 54.1% holding a university degree and 51% having a normal weight (Table 1).

Table 1.

Frequency Distribution of Demographic Characteristics Among Hospital Employees in Southeast of Iran

VariablesNo. (%)
Age, (y)
Equal/less than 3078 (40.2)
31 - 4068 (35.1)
More than 4048 (24.7)
Gender
Male 63 (32.5)
Female 131 (67.5)
Education
Primary/secondary/high school degree33 (17.0)
High school diploma56 (28.9)
University graduate105 (54.1)
BMI
Thin10 (5.2)
Normal 99 (51.0)
Overweight 61 (31.4)
Obese 24 (12.4)
Job
Nurse 95 (49.0)
Patient transfer20 (10.3)
Nursing assistant 18 (9.3)
Cleaning 61 (31.4)
Job experience (y)
Equal/less than 583 (42.8)
6 - 1049 (25.3)
11 - 2041 (21.1)
More than 2021 (10.8)
Exercise (per week)
Yes 59 (30.4)
No 135 (69.6)
Second job
Yes Yes
No187 (96.4)

The work ability score ranged from 22 to 49, with a mean of 40.86 ± 6.07. Most participants were at an excellent (40.2%) or good (34.5%) level of work ability.

In a one-factor model, there was a downward trend in work ability with age, with work ability significantly lower in individuals over 40 years old (P < 0.001). Similarly, individuals with more than 20 years of job experience reported lower work ability than those with 6 - 20 years of experience (P = 0.001) or less than 6 years (P < 0.001). The mean work ability was significantly higher among male individuals (P = 0.029) and those who exercised weekly (P = 0.038). Work ability was also significantly greater among people with a university degree compared to those with only school education (P = 0.038). Individuals with normal weight had higher work ability than obese individuals (P = 0.001), and work ability was significantly lower in nursing assistants compared to nurses (P = 0.021) and patient transfer staff (P = 0.002) (Table 2). In a multi-factor model, the most important factors associated with work ability were age, education, BMI, and job category (Table 2).

Table 2.

Association of Demographic Factors with Work Ability Among Hospital Employees in Southeast of Iran

VariablesWork Ability, Mean ± SDOne-factor Model (P-Value)Multi-factor Model (P-Value)
Age, (y)
Equal/less than 3042.74 ± 6.11 < 0.0010.007
31 - 4041.18 ± 5.20 < 0.0010.019
More than 4037.33 ± 5.72ReferenceReference
GenderNS
Male 42.22 ± 5.400.029
Female 40.20 ± 6.28Reference
Education
Primary/secondary/high school degree38.33 ± 6.710.0380.286
High school diploma42.43 ± 5.320.1020.005
University graduate40.81 ± 6.01ReferenceReference
BMI
Thin40.40 ± 6.400.2600.943
Normal 42.54 ± 5.220.0010.026
Overweight 39.36 ± 6.280.3060.404
Obese 37.92 ± 6.84ReferenceReference
Job
Nurse 41.13 ± 5.720.0210.001
Patient transfer43.60 ± 4.960.0020.023
Cleaning40.51 ± 6.940.0660.018
Nursing assistant 37.56 ± 4.26ReferenceReference
Job experience, (y)NS
Equal/less than 542.69 ± 5.27 < 0.001
6 - 1041.28 ± 6.230.001
11 - 2039.07 ± 5.780.054
More than 2036.10 ± 6.07Reference
ExerciseNS
Yes 42.22 ± 6.060.038
No 40.26 ± 5.99Reference
Second jobNS
Yes 39.14 ± 6.590.448
No 40.92 ± 6.06Reference

Abbreviation: NS, not significant.

Pain was most prevalent in the lower back (53.1%), hand (51.0%), knee (45.4%), lower leg (45.4%), upper back (33.5%), and neck (35.1%) (Table 3).

Table 3.

Association Between Pain and Work Ability Among Hospital Employees in Southeast of Iran

Pain area No. (%)Work AbilityP-Value
One-factor ModelMulti-factor Model 1 aMulti-factor Model 2 b
Neck 0.001NSNS
No 126 (64.9)41.95 ± 5.58
Yes 68 (35.1)38.82 ± 6.43
Shoulder 0.005NSNS
No 138 (71.1)41.62 ± 5.83
Yes 56 (28.9)38.96 ± 6.27
Upper Back0.0950.009NS
No 129 (66.5)41.37 ± 5.61
Yes 65 (33.5)39.83 ± 6.82
Arm 0.019NSNS
No 156 (80.4)41.36 ± 5.82
Yes 38 (19.6)38.79 ± 6.69
Lower Back < 0.001 < 0.0010.002
No 91 (46.9)43.25 ± 4.82
Yes 103 (53.1)38.74 ± 6.28
Lower arm0.015NSNS
No 170 (87.6)41.25 ± 5.81
Yes 24 (12.4)38.04 ± 7.19
Wrist < 0.001NSNS
No 141 (72.7)41.93 ± 5.61
Yes 53 (27.3)38.00 ± 6.35
Hip 0.029NSNS
No 177 (91.2)41.15 ± 6.00
Yes 17 (8.8)37.76 ± 6.13
Thigh < 0.0010.0030.004
No 174 (89.7)41.48 ± 5.74
Yes 20 (10.3)35.40 ± 6.22
Knee < 0.0010.0020.026
No 106 (54.6)42.84 ± 5.64
Yes 88 (45.4)38.46 ± 5.72
Lower leg < 0.001NSNS
No 106 (54.6)41.68 ± 5.77
Yes 88 (45.4)37.88 ± 6.25
Hand < 0.0010.023NS
No 95 (49.0)42.65 ± 5.45
Yes 99 (51.0)39.13 ± 6.15
Foot0.004NSNS
No 170 (87.6)41.32 ± 5.86
Yes 24 (12.4)37.86 ± 6.61

Abbreviation: NS, not significant.

a Multi-factor model 1: Using forward method.

b Multi-factor model 2: Adjusted model 1 for age, job, education, and BMI.

In a one-factor model, work ability significantly decreased with pain in all body parts (P < 0.05) except for the upper back area (P = 0.095) (Table 3). In the multi-factor model, pain in the upper back (P = 0.009), lower back (P < 0.001), thigh (P = 0.003), knee (P = 0.002), and hand (P = 0.023) significantly decreased work ability. After adjusting for age, job, education, and BMI, work ability was still significantly affected by pain in the lower back (P = 0.002), thigh (P = 0.004), and knee (P = 0.026) (Table 3).

There was a significant negative correlation between work ability and discomfort score (r = -0.337, P < 0.001). The mean discomfort score was 184.97 ± 225.12 in nursing assistants, 68.26 ± 114.62 in nurses, 53.62 ± 60.14 in cleaning staff, and 48.85 ± 85.94 in patient transfer staff. The mean discomfort score was significantly higher for nursing assistants compared to other groups (P < 0.05).

5. Discussion

The research revealed that over 40% of participants had a good WAI score. Factors such as age, gender, education level, BMI, job type, work experience, and physical activity had a significant impact on WAI, with the strongest effects observed for age, education, BMI, and occupation. Pain was most prevalent in the lower back, thigh, and knee, areas that were strongly associated with diminished work ability. An inverse relationship was found between pain and work ability, indicating that higher levels of pain were linked to lower work ability. Nursing assistants and cleaning staff reported the lowest average WAI scores, while patient transporters recorded the highest.

This study observed a decline in individuals' WAI scores with increasing age, with the lowest scores found in those over 40 years old. This trend aligns with previous research on workers in Poland, which has identified a similar pattern. Some studies suggest that this decline in work ability is a natural consequence of aging, particularly after the age of 45. However, it is also important to consider that body weight, as indicated by BMI, tends to increase with age, and being overweight may contribute to lower work ability among older adults (28).

The study revealed that participants had an average of 8.75 years of work experience. It also identified a significant relationship between the WAI and work experience, with individuals who had 20 or more years of experience often exhibiting the lowest WAI scores. This finding suggests that those with longer careers may be at a higher risk of physical and mental health issues due to the demanding nature of their work and extended working hours (29, 30).

In this study, individuals classified as obese had significantly lower WAI scores compared to their non-obese counterparts. Previous studies have also demonstrated a correlation between obesity and reduced work ability (18, 31, 32).

Furthermore, a significant association was found between education level and work ability. Prior research suggests that higher education levels positively impact WAI and support the application of ergonomic principles in the workplace (33).

Consistent with earlier research (34, 35), individuals who participated in sports activities demonstrated significantly higher work ability levels than those who did not engage in such activities. Additionally, it is estimated that approximately 1 kilogram of weight loss can be expected for every 50 minutes of exercise performed per week over a six-month period (36). Health education has also been shown to effectively support weight reduction among employees. In a study by Peter et al., examining the impact of Japanese health education on adult workers, a significant decrease in participants' average weight was reported following the completion of the health education program (37).

In contrast to Akodu and Ashalejo's study (38), we observed a significant correlation between gender and WAI, with men exhibiting higher WAI scores than women. Previous studies suggest that this difference in WAI may be linked to women’s generally lower average physical strength and muscle mass compared to men, as well as their greater susceptibility to musculoskeletal injuries (39). Furthermore, our findings reveal a significant inverse relationship between WAI and discomfort scores, indicating that MSDs are key factors contributing to reduced WAI. Studies on oil company workers have suggested that men’s denser fibrous and muscular tissues, which contain less water than women’s, may contribute to women’s heightened vulnerability to musculoskeletal issues (17).

We identified a significant disparity in work ability across various occupational categories, with nursing assistants showing the lowest Work Ability Index (mean WAI = 37.56) and patient transporters demonstrating the highest (mean WAI = 43.6). This variation could be linked to demographic factors such as age and work experience. Additionally, MSDs have a substantial impact on work ability, as evidenced by the higher average discomfort scores reported by nursing assistants compared to other groups.

The results from the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire revealed a strong association between WAI and discomfort in the back, thigh, and knee regions, regardless of factors like age, education, employment history, occupational group, BMI, and other pain factors. Upon examining pain areas across different groups (specific results not provided), it was noted that nursing assistants reported more discomfort in regions such as the neck, knees, and lower back (lumbar) than their counterparts.

Consistent with our findings, there is a significant association between the frequency of MSDs, reduced musculoskeletal capacity, high psychological work demands, and diminished work ability (40). Research has shown that the prevalence of MSDs among employees increases as work ability declines over a period of four years (7). Various factors contribute to these disorders, including increased physical workload, lifting heavy items, patient transportation, obesity, age, and gender. Additionally, improper body mechanics strongly correlate with MSDs. Key contributors to these issues include bending, neck turning, prolonged sitting or standing, and performing manual tasks (41).

The higher average MSD scores among nursing assistants likely contribute to their lower work ability compared to other groups. The role of nursing assistants requires significant physical activity in patient care, as they spend much of their time standing and are often required to lift or move patients and equipment, with primary duties focused on bedside care (40).

In line with our findings, Naoum et al. demonstrated that work ability tends to remain stable in professions that demand high mental engagement and independence but involve minimal physical strain. Nurse supervisors often benefit from these conditions due to their experience and career progression. Conversely, non-supervisory nurses face heavier workloads and additional clinical responsibilities, which may lead to fatigue and irritability (42). Similarly, Choi and Brings found that nurses and assistant nurses who manually lift and transport overweight and obese patients are more susceptible to developing MSDs (43). Transferring such patients is a significant risk factor for MSDs, particularly back pain. According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) guidelines, the maximum recommended weight for patient lifting is 15 kilograms. It has been documented that using transfer aids, such as basket-slings, ceiling lifts, and sliding boards, as well as providing proper training on patient lifting and movement techniques, can prevent numerous injuries and health problems among hospital staff (43). In agreement with our study, a cross-sectional investigation into WMSDs among healthcare workers revealed a notable association between back and neck pain and specific job roles. Evaluations conducted with the Quick Exposure Check (QEC) tool indicated a high-risk level (L = 4) for WMSDs among healthcare personnel involved in patient carrying or transferring, and a medium action level (L = 3) for nurses who stand for extended periods (44).

Our results align with the findings of Pompeii et al., who reported that patient handling tasks account for a significant proportion (one-third) of musculoskeletal injuries. Their study also found that nurse aides were twice as likely to experience a patient handling injury compared to inpatient nurses. After nurse aides, the highest rates of MSDs were observed in emergency medical technicians, patient transporters, operating room technicians, and morgue staff (40).

Karahan et al. conducted a study on the prevalence and contributing factors of low back pain among various Turkish hospital staff, including nurses, doctors, physical therapists, technicians, secretaries, and hospital aides. In their study, nurses reported the highest prevalence of low back pain (45).

Similarly, research has highlighted that nurses working in intensive care units face increased risks of injuries related to physical material handling. Additionally, moderate to high workloads are associated with a greater likelihood of developing MSDs, which can impair nurses’ ability to perform their duties effectively (46).

In the current study, cleaners had lower WAI scores compared to nurses, likely due to their workload and the factors contributing to musculoskeletal disorders. A previous study reported a high prevalence of MSDs among hospital cleaners, with the lower back (57.7%) and shoulder (52.6%) being the most commonly affected areas. Poor ergonomic design in workspaces and cleaning equipment exacerbates the challenges cleaners face in performing their tasks effectively. Research on MSDs among subcontracted hospital cleaners in Thailand indicated that the cleaning industry has the fourth-highest absenteeism rate. Cleaning responsibilities in medical facilities differ significantly from those in office buildings, as they are subject to strict hygiene standards requiring frequent cleaning to minimize the risk of infectious microorganisms that could endanger both patients and staff (47). Additionally, hospital cleaners often work in preparation for 24-hour shifts, and the dynamic hospital environment, with constantly moving patients and shifting requirements, contributes to a hectic and congested workspace.

In comparison, workers in India's Class 4 categories undertake departmental tasks such as cleaning, assisting nurses with patient transportation, changing patients, and preparing them for surgery. This group commonly reports feeling underpaid, experiencing high levels of work-related stress, struggling to balance personal and professional life, and lacking emotional or social support from colleagues (48).

In the current study, the subjects' mean WAI was 40.86. According to the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, this value falls within the "good" range, indicating that the healthcare professionals studied should receive support to further enhance their work competence. Most research on WAI among nursing staff has found an average score between 37 and 43, which is categorized as good. However, other studies have reported that employees' work ability is mediocre, with scores ranging between 28 and 36 (49).

Consistent with the findings of earlier studies, ergonomic interventions, physical exercise, and behavioral changes have a positive impact on reducing the frequency of WMSDs and enhancing the work ability of affected individuals (50, 51).

Furthermore, there is increasing recognition within the healthcare sector of the need to enhance personal skills and capabilities among its workforce. Consequently, there is a global demand for in-service training, which not only improves staff proficiency but also reduces errors and enhances the quality of patient care (52, 53).

5.1. Limitations

This study has several limitations. Firstly, its cross-sectional design precludes establishing causal relationships among the variables. Secondly, the study was conducted in a single hospital, so differences in management systems and physical conditions in other hospitals may yield different results. Additionally, due to the demanding workload of clinical staff and challenges in securing participation, questionnaires were not uniformly completed across all hospital departments and occupational groups, such as the medical team.

5.2. Conclusions

Our findings suggest a potential link between MSDs and work ability. Therefore, we recommend implementing a program focused on identifying and addressing the risk factors associated with MSDs. Such an approach would help alleviate these conditions, improve the work capacity of hospital staff, and prevent early disability and retirement. Additionally, given the inadequate working conditions for healthcare providers in the hospital under study and the need for patient transfer aids, it is essential to emphasize the importance of conducting training sessions to raise employees' awareness of the causes of MSDs and effective preventive strategies.

Acknowledgements

References

  • 1.

    Monazzam Esmaielpour MR, Zakerian SA, Abbasi M, Ábbasi Balochkhaneh F, Mousavi Kordmiri SH. Investigating the effect of noise exposure on mental disorders and the work ability index among industrial workers. Noise & Vibration Worldwide. 2021;53(1-2):3-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/09574565211052690.

  • 2.

    Bugajska J, Makowiec-Dąbrowska T, Jegier A, Marszałek A. Physical work capacity (VO2 max) and work ability (WAI) of active employees (men and women) in Poland. International Congress Series. 2005;1280:156-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2005.03.001.

  • 3.

    Habibi E, Dehghan H, Zeinodini M, Yousefi H, Hasanzadeh A. A Study on Work Ability Index and Physical Work Capacity on the Base of Fax Equation VO(2) Max in Male Nursing Hospital Staff in Isfahan, Iran. Int J Prev Med. 2012;3(11):776-82. [PubMed ID: 23189229]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC3506089].

  • 4.

    von Bonsdorff ME, Kokko K, Seitsamo J, von Bonsdorff MB, Nygard CH, Ilmarinen J, et al. Work strain in midlife and 28-year work ability trajectories. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2011;37(6):455-63. [PubMed ID: 21695372]. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3177.

  • 5.

    Bugajska J, Sagan A. Chronic musculoskeletal disorders as risk factors for reduced work ability in younger and ageing workers. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(4):607-15. [PubMed ID: 25513796]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2014.11077069.

  • 6.

    Reeuwijk KG, Robroek SJ, Hakkaart L, Burdorf A. How work impairments and reduced work ability are associated with health care use in workers with musculoskeletal disorders, cardiovascular disorders or mental disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(4):631-9. [PubMed ID: 24390780]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4229647]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-013-9492-3.

  • 7.

    Neupane S, Virtanen P, Leino-Arjas P, Miranda H, Siukola A, Nygard CH. Multi-site pain and working conditions as predictors of work ability in a 4-year follow-up among food industry employees. Eur J Pain. 2013;17(3):444-51. [PubMed ID: 22865480]. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1532-2149.2012.00198.x.

  • 8.

    Kaila-Kangas L, Haukka E, Miranda H, Kivekas T, Ahola K, Luukkonen R, et al. Common mental and musculoskeletal disorders as predictors of disability retirement among Finns. J Affect Disord. 2014;165:38-44. [PubMed ID: 24882175]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2014.04.036.

  • 9.

    Parno A, Sayehmiri K, Nabi Amjad R, Ivanbagha R, Hosseini Ahagh MM, Hosseini Foladi S, et al. Meta-analysis Study of Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Iran. Archives of Rehabilitation. 2020;21(2):182-205. eng. https://doi.org/10.32598/rj.21.2.2444.4.

  • 10.

    Mohammadzadeh M, Habibi E, Hassanzadeh A. [Relationship between work ability and mental workload with musculoskeletal disorders in industrial jobs]. J Preventive Med. 2015;2(4):29-38. FA.

  • 11.

    Kee D. Characteristics of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders in Korea. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(2). [PubMed ID: 36673780]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC9859549]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021024.

  • 12.

    Clari M, Godono A, Garzaro G, Voglino G, Gualano MR, Migliaretti G, et al. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among perioperative nurses: a systematic review and META-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021;22(1):226. [PubMed ID: 33637081]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7908783]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04057-3.

  • 13.

    Tavakkol R, Karimi A, Hassanipour S, Gharahzadeh A, Fayzi R. A Multidisciplinary Focus Review of Musculoskeletal Disorders Among Operating Room Personnel. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2020;13:735-41. [PubMed ID: 32801736]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7402850]. https://doi.org/10.2147/JMDH.S259245.

  • 14.

    Anjum N. Common work-related musculoskeletal disorders among the nurses in different Hospitals. Bangladesh Health Professions Institute, Faculty of Medicine, the University …; 2022.

  • 15.

    Aleku M NK AAWMLH. Lower back pain as an occupational hazard among Ugandan health workers. ront Public Health. 2021;9:765-1. [PubMed ID: 34926384]. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.761765.

  • 16.

    Al Johani WA, Pascual Pascua G. Impacts of manual handling training and lifting devices on risks of back pain among nurses: an integrative literature review. Nurse Media J Nurs. 2019;9(2). https://doi.org/10.14710/nmjn.v9i2.26435.

  • 17.

    Ge H, Sun X, Liu J, Zhang C. The Status of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Its Influence on the Working Ability of Oil Workers in Xinjiang, China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018;15(5). [PubMed ID: 29695120]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC5981881]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15050842.

  • 18.

    Gharibi V, Mokarami H, Taban A, Yazdani Aval M, Samimi K, Salesi M. Effects of Work-Related Stress on Work Ability Index among Iranian Workers. Saf Health Work. 2016;7(1):43-8. [PubMed ID: 27014490]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4792919]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.10.005.

  • 19.

    Pohjonen T, Ranta R. Effects of worksite physical exercise intervention on physical fitness, perceived health status, and work ability among home care workers: five-year follow-up. Prev Med. 2001;32(6):465-75. [PubMed ID: 11394950]. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.2001.0837.

  • 20.

    Safari S, Akbari J, Kazemi M, Mououdi MA, Mahaki B. Personnel's health surveillance at work: effect of age, body mass index, and shift work on mental workload and work ability index. J Environ Public Health. 2013;2013:289498. [PubMed ID: 23956756]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC3730146]. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/289498.

  • 21.

    Adel M, Akbar R, Ehsan G. Validity and reliability of work ability index (WAI) questionnaire among Iranian workers; a study in petrochemical and car manufacturing industries. J Occup Health. 2019;61(2):165-74. [PubMed ID: 30866128]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6499439]. https://doi.org/10.1002/1348-9585.12028.

  • 22.

    Roelen CA, Heymans MW, Twisk JW, van der Klink JJ, Groothoff JW, van Rhenen W. Work Ability Index as tool to identify workers at risk of premature work exit. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(4):747-54. [PubMed ID: 24627206]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9505-x.

  • 23.

    Ebener M, Hasselhorn HM. Validation of Short Measures of Work Ability for Research and Employee Surveys. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(18). [PubMed ID: 31547466]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6765804]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16183386.

  • 24.

    Freyer M, Formazin M, Rose U. Factorial Validity of the Work Ability Index Among Employees in Germany. J Occup Rehabil. 2019;29(2):433-42. [PubMed ID: 30069811]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6531402]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9803-9.

  • 25.

    Afifehzadeh-Kashani H, Choobineh A, Bakand S, Gohari MR, Abbastabar H, Moshtaghi P. [Validity and reliability of farsi version of Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ)]. Iran Occupational Health. 2011;7(4).

  • 26.

    Eynipour A, Arjmand N, Dianat I, Soltanian AR, Heidarimoghadam R. Assessing Musculoskeletal Disorder Risks in an Automobile Part Manufacturing Factory: A Comparison Study of Biomechanical and Ergonomic Tools. Health Scope. 2024;13(2). https://doi.org/10.5812/healthscope-139610.

  • 27.

    Rawan MRM, Daril MAM, Subari K, Wahab MIA. A Comparative Studies of Ten Ergonomics Risk Assessment Methods. Advanced Transdisciplinary Engineering and Technology. 2022. p. 153-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-01488-8_15.

  • 28.

    Lua I, de Araujo TM, Santos KOB, de Almeida MMG. Factors associated with common mental disorders among female nursing professionals in primary health care. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2018;31(1):20. [PubMed ID: 32026111]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6967319]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41155-018-0101-4.

  • 29.

    Sharma F, Kalra S, Rai R, Chorsiya V, Sunil Dular SD. Work-related Musculoskeletal Disorders, Workability and its Predictors among Nurses Working in Delhi Hospitals: A Multicentric Survey. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2022. https://doi.org/10.7860/jcdr/2022/57953.16925.

  • 30.

    Sormunen E, Remes J, Hassi J, Pienimaki T, Rintamaki H. Factors associated with self-estimated work ability and musculoskeletal symptoms among male and female workers in cooled food-processing facilities. Ind Health. 2009;47(3):271-82. [PubMed ID: 19531913]. https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.47.271.

  • 31.

    Andersen LL, Izquierdo M, Sundstrup E. Overweight and obesity are progressively associated with lower work ability in the general working population: cross-sectional study among 10,000 adults. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2017;90(8):779-87. [PubMed ID: 28660321]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-017-1240-0.

  • 32.

    Fischer FM, Martinez MC. Individual features, working conditions and work injuries are associated with work ability among nursing professionals. Work. 2013;45(4):509-17. [PubMed ID: 23676329]. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-131637.

  • 33.

    Rypicz L, Witczak I, Rosinczuk J, Karniej P, Kolcz A. Factors affecting work ability index among polish nurses working in hospitals - A prospective observational survey. J Nurs Manag. 2021;29(3):468-76. [PubMed ID: 33098143]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC8246998]. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13192.

  • 34.

    Grimani A, Aboagye E, Kwak L. The effectiveness of workplace nutrition and physical activity interventions in improving productivity, work performance and workability: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1676. [PubMed ID: 31830955]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6909496]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-8033-1.

  • 35.

    Kettunen O, Vuorimaa T, Vasankari T. 12-mo intervention of physical exercise improved work ability, especially in subjects with low baseline work ability. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2014;11(4):3859-69. [PubMed ID: 24714059]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC4025014]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph110403859.

  • 36.

    Petridou A, Siopi A, Mougios V. Exercise in the management of obesity. Metabolism. 2019;92:163-9. [PubMed ID: 30385379]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2018.10.009.

  • 37.

    Peter AS, Pastor NIS, T. Sarza Jr S, Ap Apid R, Suchinda MJ, Sasamori F, et al. A Report on Attempts to Acquire Exercise Habits Through Japanese Health Education for Adult Workers from Cebu, Philippines. Health Scope. 2023;12(4). https://doi.org/10.5812/healthscope-134198.

  • 38.

    Akodu AK, Ashalejo ZO. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders and work ability among hospital nurses. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2019;14(3):252-61. [PubMed ID: 31435414]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC6694919]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtumed.2019.02.009.

  • 39.

    Arsalani N, Fallahi-Khoshknab M, Josephson M, Lagerstrom M. Musculoskeletal disorders and working conditions among Iranian nursing personnel. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2014;20(4):671-80. [PubMed ID: 25513802]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2014.11077073.

  • 40.

    Pompeii LA, Lipscomb HJ, Schoenfisch AL, Dement JM. Musculoskeletal injuries resulting from patient handling tasks among hospital workers. Am J Ind Med. 2009;52(7):571-8. [PubMed ID: 19444808]. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20704.

  • 41.

    Tabatabaei S, Khani Jazani R, Kavousi A, Azhdardor M. [Relationship between musculoskeletal disorders and quality of life in employees of selected hospitals in Golestan Province]. J Health Res community. 2017;3(1). FA.

  • 42.

    Naoum SM, Koutserimpas C, Spinthouri M. Musculoskeletal disorders and caring behaviors among nursing staff in Greek hospitals: A prospective multicenter study. Maedica. 1997;17(1):63-52. [PubMed ID: 35733744]. https://doi.org/10.26574/maedica.2022.17.1.52.

  • 43.

    Choi SD, Brings K. Work-related musculoskeletal risks associated with nurses and nursing assistants handling overweight and obese patients: A literature review. Work. 2015;53(2):439-48. [PubMed ID: 26835850]. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-152222.

  • 44.

    Hammig O. Work- and stress-related musculoskeletal and sleep disorders among health professionals: a cross-sectional study in a hospital setting in Switzerland. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020;21(1):319. [PubMed ID: 32438929]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC7243303]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03327-w.

  • 45.

    Karahan A, Kav S, Abbasoglu A, Dogan N. Low back pain: prevalence and associated risk factors among hospital staff. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(3):516-24. [PubMed ID: 19222649]. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04905.x.

  • 46.

    Ou YK, Liu Y, Chang YP, Lee BO. Relationship between Musculoskeletal Disorders and Work Performance of Nursing Staff: A Comparison of Hospital Nursing Departments. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(13). [PubMed ID: 34281022]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC8297183]. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18137085.

  • 47.

    Salwe K, Kumar S, Hood J. Nonfatal occupational injury rates and musculoskeletal symptoms among housekeeping employees of a hospital in Texas. J Environ Public Health. 2011;2011:382510. [PubMed ID: 21776437]. [PubMed Central ID: PMC3136138]. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/382510.

  • 48.

    Parikh S, Mehta J, Thakkar M, Thakkar N, Gauswami M. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders and its risk factors among Class 4 workers of rural tertiary health-care hospitals in Western India: A cross-sectional study. Natl J Physiol Pharm Pharmacol. 2022;(0). https://doi.org/10.5455/njppp.2022.12.03144202212052022.

  • 49.

    Gould R, Ilmarinen J, Järvisalo J, Koskinen S. Dimensions of work ability: results of the Health 2000 Survey. Vaasa, Finland: Helsinki: Finnish Center for Pentions; 2008.

  • 50.

    Pleho D, Mačak Hadžiomerović A, Pašalić A, Katana B, Jaganjac A. The effect of the ergonomic intervention program on work-related musculoskeletal disorders in healthcare professionals. Journal of Health Sciences. 2024;13(3 (Suplement 1)):223-7. https://doi.org/10.17532/jhs.2023.2624.

  • 51.

    Silva T, Araujo WN, Stival MM, Toledo AM, Burke TN, Carregaro RL. Musculoskeletal discomfort, work ability and fatigue in nursing professionals working in a hospital environment. Rev Esc Enferm USP. 2018;52. e03332. [PubMed ID: 29898170]. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1980-220X2017022903332.

  • 52.

    Javan Biparva A, Gholamzadeh Nikjoo R, Jannati A, Arab M, Ostadi A. Active Risk Management Program in Operating Rooms of Hospitals in Different Countries: A Scoping Review Study. Health Scope. 2023;12(3). https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope-134463.

  • 53.

    Choopani A, Vatankhah S, Aryankhesal A. Health Workforce Development Policies in Iran: A Study of In-service Training Policies. Health Scope. 2023;12(2). https://doi.org/10.5812/jhealthscope-132662.