42
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Influence of frequency and duration of strength training for effective management of neck and shoulder pain: a randomised controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Specific strength training can reduce neck and shoulder pain in office workers, but the optimal combination of exercise frequency and duration remains unknown. This study investigates how one weekly hour of strength training for the neck and shoulder muscles is most effectively distributed.

          Methods

          A total of 447 office workers with and without neck and/or shoulder pain were randomly allocated at the cluster-level to one of four groups; 1×60 (1WS), 3×20 (3WS) or 9×7 (9WS) min a week of supervised high-intensity strength training for 20 weeks, or to a reference group without training (REF). Primary outcome was self-reported neck and shoulder pain (scale 0–9) and secondary outcome work disability (Disability in Arms, Shoulders and Hands (DASH)).

          Results

          The intention-to-treat analysis showed reduced neck and right shoulder pain in the training groups after 20 weeks compared with REF. Among those with pain ≥3 at baseline (n=256), all three training groups achieved significant reduction in neck pain compared with REF (p<0.01). From a baseline pain rating of 3.2 (SD 2.3) in the neck among neck cases, 1WS experienced a reduction of 1.14 (95% CI 0.17 to 2.10), 3WS 1.88 (0.90 to 2.87) and 9WS 1.35 (0.24 to 2.46) which is considered clinically significant. DASH was reduced in 1WS and 3WS only.

          Conclusion

          One hour of specific strength training effectively reduced neck and shoulder pain in office workers. Although the three contrasting training groups showed no statistical differences in neck pain reduction, only 1WS and 3WS reduced DASH. This study suggests some flexibility regarding time-wise distribution when implementing specific strength training at the workplace.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Evidence for prescribing exercise as therapy in chronic disease.

          Considerable knowledge has accumulated in recent decades concerning the significance of physical activity in the treatment of a number of diseases, including diseases that do not primarily manifest as disorders of the locomotive apparatus. In this review we present the evidence for prescribing exercise therapy in the treatment of metabolic syndrome-related disorders (insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension, obesity), heart and pulmonary diseases (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, chronic heart failure, intermittent claudication), muscle, bone and joint diseases (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, osteoporosis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome) and cancer, depression, asthma and type 1 diabetes. For each disease, we review the effect of exercise therapy on disease pathogenesis, on symptoms specific to the diagnosis, on physical fitness or strength and on quality of life. The possible mechanisms of action are briefly examined and the principles for prescribing exercise therapy are discussed, focusing on the type and amount of exercise and possible contraindications.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The effects of eccentric versus concentric resistance training on muscle strength and mass in healthy adults: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

            The aim of this systematic review was to determine if eccentric exercise is superior to concentric exercise in stimulating gains in muscle strength and mass. Meta-analyses were performed for comparisons between eccentric and concentric training as means to improve muscle strength and mass. In order to determine the importance of different parameters of training, subgroup analyses of intensity of exercise, velocity of movement and mode of contraction were also performed. Twenty randomised controlled trials studies met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analyses showed that when eccentric exercise was performed at higher intensities compared with concentric training, total strength and eccentric strength increased more significantly. However, compared with concentric training, strength gains after eccentric training appeared more specific in terms of velocity and mode of contraction. Eccentric training performed at high intensities was shown to be more effective in promoting increases in muscle mass measured as muscle girth. In addition, eccentric training also showed a trend towards increased muscle cross-sectional area measured with magnetic resonance imaging or computerised tomography. Subgroup analyses suggest that the superiority of eccentric training to increase muscle strength and mass appears to be related to the higher loads developed during eccentric contractions. The specialised neural pattern of eccentric actions possibly explains the high specificity of strength gains after eccentric training. Further research is required to investigate the underlying mechanisms of this specificity and its functional significance in terms of transferability of strength gains to more complex human movements.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity.

              The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) outcome measure was developed to evaluate disability and symptoms in single or multiple disorders of the upper limb at one point or at many points in time. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the DASH in a group of diverse patients and to compare the results with those obtained with joint-specific measures. Two hundred patients with either wrist/hand or shoulder problems were evaluated by use of questionnaires before treatment, and 172 (86%) were re-evaluated 12 weeks after treatment. Eighty-six patients also completed a test-retest questionnaire three to five days after the initial (baseline) evaluation. The questionnaire package included the DASH, the Brigham (carpal tunnel) questionnaire, the SPADI (Shoulder Pain and Disability Index), and other markers of pain and function. Correlations or t-tests between the DASH and the other measures were used to assess construct validity. Test-retest reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and other summary statistics. Responsiveness was described using standardized response means, receiver operating characteristics curves, and correlations between change in DASH score and change in scores of other measures. Standard response means were used to compare DASH responsiveness with that of the Brigham questionnaire and the SPADI in each region. The DASH was found to correlate with other measures (r > 0.69) and to discriminate well, for example, between patients who were working and those who were not (p<0.0001). Test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.96) exceeded guidelines. The responsiveness of the DASH (to self-rated or expected change) was comparable with or better than that of the joint-specific measures in the whole group and in each region. Evidence was provided of the validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of the DASH. This study also demonstrated that the DASH had validity and responsiveness in both proximal and distal disorders, confirming its usefulness across the whole extremity.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Sports Med
                Br J Sports Med
                bjsports
                bjsm
                British Journal of Sports Medicine
                BMJ Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                0306-3674
                1473-0480
                November 2012
                29 June 2012
                : 46
                : 14
                : 1004-1010
                Affiliations
                [1 ]National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [2 ]Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
                [3 ]Institute of Exercise and Sport Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [4 ]Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
                [5 ]Gait Analysis Laboratory, Hvidovre Hospital, Hvidovre, Denmark
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Christoffer H Andersen, National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkalle 105, Copenhagen 2100, Denmark; cha@ 123456nrcwe.dk
                Article
                bjsports-2011-090813
                10.1136/bjsports-2011-090813
                3596862
                22753863
                1c2b40c4-f462-4380-8db5-6a556c4fdf00
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/legalcode

                History
                : 29 November 2011
                : 17 April 2012
                Categories
                Original Articles

                Sports medicine
                Sports medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article