Talk:Musculoskeletal disorder

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Lack of connection between I/O psychology and MSDs[edit]

I deleted the see also link to the industrial and organizational psychology page because there is little to no connection between the two topics. For example, the two volume Handbook of Industrial, Work, and Organizational Psychology doesn't even mention it in the index. The Encyclopedia of I and O Psychology has no entry on the topic. I cannot find it in the indexes of I/O textbooks by Schultz & Schultz, Riggio, Levy, Lowenberg & Conrad, Landy & Conte, or Aamodt. It is not at all clear why an MSD article reader would be directed to the I & O article.

Because work psychology and work psychologists are directly concerned with occupational stress (which is one cause of muscoskeletal disorders) as well as human factors and ergonomics.
This is your opinion. Where is your reference linking MSDs to I/O psychology?
Much research has been conducted by the institute of work psychology (IWP) for instance in the UK, and a growing interest internationally by work psychologists in the physical health outcomes, of occupational stress. This source is very specific. [1] The minor inclusion of work psychology in the 'see also' section of this article seems relevant and justified for all of these reasons.Mrm7171 (talk) 01:27, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
I do not understand your point. So one I/O psychologist wrote a paper about MSDs. How does that make the I/O article relevant? Psyc12 (talk) 02:29, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

WP:SEEALSO is the policy. "See also" section do not have to be directly related to the topic of the article because one purpose of "See also" links is to enable readers to explore tangentially related topics. I have also shown the relevancy clearly above. You then asked, directly above, for a "reference linking MSDs to I/O psychology". I provided one. There are other reliable sources specific to MSDs too. That one just happened to already be in the article. Let's move on.Mrm7171 (talk) 02:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

I also think it is okay to have both work psychology and occupational health psychology in the 'see also' section. Seems both are relevant and would enable readers to explore both tangentially related topics? But to exclude one area over the other seems very wrong to me?Mrm7171 (talk) 04:35, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
According to WP:SEEALSO, an internal link should be relevant. As much as I appreciate i/o psychology as a discipline, it is not relevant to the problem of MSDs. The article by Sprigg et al. does not make i/o relevant to MSDs. Iss246 (talk) 21:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Biomechanical factors[edit]

Although psychosocial workplace factors have been found to contribute to MSDs, I think the article should put greater emphasis on biomechanical factors such as repetitive motion, heavy lifting, etc. Iss246 (talk) 19:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

@Atama:. This is consistent with Atama's feedback about this article. It should focus more on the disorder itself, with workplace being a source, but not only source of MSDs. Thus repetitive motion can occur in many domains of life, not only work. The carpal tunnel syndrome article is a possible model. Psyc12 (talk) 20:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I add this. The causes section weighs psychosocial factors more heavily than biomechanical factors. I think that it is not worthwhile to include low job satisfaction and high psychological distress as causes of MSDs. The claim that those two factors cause MDSs is speculative at best. The two factors could just be correlates of MSDs or, even, the result of MSDs. I think that among the causes biomechanical factors should be more prominently featured. Iss246 (talk) 20:35, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate it that Psyc12 deleted occupational stress from the list of causes. The term "occupational stress" too nonspecific. High job strain, which is already present in the article is more specific (low decision latitude combined with high workload).

I would like to delete psychological distress and low job satisfaction as per what I wrote above. Iss246 (talk) 21:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Treatments[edit]

It would be helpful to readers if the article included some evidence-based treatments. Iss246 (talk) 21:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Psychosocial work hazards?[edit]

I would like to delete these extended and unnecessary references and dialogue to work related psychosocial hazards. If we were to include these work related hazards we would really need to expand it much more. That would definitely not do the article any justice. We would then need to give equal weight to other causes too and expand those sections. It detracts from what a MSD actually is. It also focuses way too much on the occupational aspects and not the health. Yes, stress is one cause of MSD. Al;ready mentioned psychocial stressors/hazards above. Why over do it? Mrm7171 (talk) 23:48, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

These are the main psychosocial hazards from the workplace. There is no need to expand them. It would be good to also list some nonworkplace hazards if there are references on them. I did a search on MSD in the medical literature, and most studies talk about the workplace because that's a major source of these injuries. The article no longer focuses on occupational issues, but one cannot do the topic justice and take them out entirely. Atama did not suggest removing all the occupational content, just to refocus the article and provide more information on the nature of the disorders. Psyc12 (talk) 23:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

This section below is what I'm talking about. It is just not needed. If included we need to balance and give due weight to other work related hazards that recent research has also identified. Why be expanding the focus on the workplace and occupational injuries? Yes, occupational stress is one cause. But adding all this extra detail, and even listing these individual psych hazards in the workplace like you have, while then omitting so many other psych hazards that should be also included psyc12, is baffling to me? Why not just delete this section? I don't get it? Reference has already been made to psychosocial factors in the article, so why overdo it with the superfluous detail?Mrm7171 (talk) 00:18, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

"High job demands.[14] Low social support[14] Low job control[14] High job strain (combination of high psychological demands and little decision latitude)[14]"

With regard to occupational stress, high job demands, low workplace support, low job control, and job strain (a combination of high demands and low support) are the occupational stressors that I have found in literature. I could find no other occupational stressors that are related to MSDs.
I think the article needs to be expanded in two ways. First, it needs to include some biomechanical factors that pave the way to MSDs. Biomechanical factors are largely found at workplaces; I haven't been able to find articles that identify biomechanical factors outside of work. Second, the article needs to mention evidence-based treatments for MSDs. Iss246 (talk) 01:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
There are many psychosocial work hazards similar to the ones listed in the article. I could list them all. But I am saying this section on specific occupational psychosocial hazards mentioned? just needs to be deleted entirely. It is not necessary. If these specific occupational psychosocial hazards are included, then an 'entire expansion' of those work related psychosocial stressors and hazards needs to be undertaken. Why not just delete the section and leave it at psychgosocial hazards as just one cause of MSDs. Full stop. No need to go into such specifics, I mean, even detailing specific occupational psychosocial stressors? Why? Completely unneeded in my opinion. We would then need to expand all of the sections on causation for balance. Takes focus away from this health article and exactly what a MSD actually is and how to treat it etc. We need to to think about the readers perspective and give due weight in this article. I would be interested in Atama's thoughts?Mrm7171 (talk) 02:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
I cut down on the number of psychosocial hazards to the minimum research findings could support. The psychosocial hazards cut across economic sectors. The article needs a more detailed section on biomechanical hazards. I anticipate that such a section will be more detailed than the section on psychosocial hazards because the biomechanical hazards vary with different kinds of work. For example, the biomechanical hazards for someone who types is different from the hazards for someone who works for a company that moves households. Both are different from the hazards for a long-haul trucker. That is why I anticipate a more detailed section on biomechanical hazards.
I still think the article would benefit from a section on evidence-based treatments for MSDs. Iss246 (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Yes iss246, a treatment section is needed. Agreed. I would like to make a couple of much needed bold edits here. For instance, currently the article includes only one theory why stress increases the risk of MSD's (ie muscle tension). There are many other theories in the literature. And again, it is stress that is believed to increase risk for MSD's, and not just in the workplace either, therefore all factors which may cause stress would be equally important including. Solution. Not mention any work psych hazards at all, as I said. Also you can't neatly separate stress risk factors from biomechanical risk factors. They are interrelated. That should be mentioned. So, they are the changes I would like to make?Mrm7171 (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

The research evidence is consistent with the psychosocial stressors already enumerated in the article. I am reluctant to add to the short list of psychosocial stressors. I think the article has to devote more text to biomechanical hazards. They are more numerous than psychosocial hazards because biomechanical hazards differ from job to job. Iss246 (talk) 03:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
A thought on another point Mrm raised. Contributions of biomechanical hazards and psychosocial stressors to MSDs can be separated. In most research on disease risk, many risk factors are intercorrelated. Researchers use MLR, logistic regression, and HLM to disentangle the effects RFs. Aside from the statistics, research has shown that MSDs can develop in individuals whose jobs expose them to psychosocial stressors but don't expose them to heavy lifting and repetitive movements. Iss246 (talk) 03:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes I do understand the statistical techniques we use to separate these variables by the way. I am very familiar with the current research regarding stress and MSD's too. However only theories exist explaining causal effect between stress and MSDs. The article only mentions muscle tension by memory? It omits other theories such as increased blood and fluid pressure, reduction of growth functions, pain sensitivity reduction, pupil dilation and so on. These theories should all be included then for due weight. The article also omits psych hazards such as job dissatisfaction (which has consistently been identified in the research). There are many other work related psych hazards and many other psychosocial factors too, that are not mentioned and obviously should be, for due weight.Mrm7171 (talk) 00:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Job dissatisfaction is a candidate variable but the research is not clear if job dissatisfaction is a contributor to MSDs or results from MSDs. Moreover, job dissatisfaction may be what Susser calls a passenger variable, affected by psychosocial stressors (e.g., job strain) which also affect the development of MSDs, making the relation between job dissatisfaction and MSDs spurious, at least from a causal standpoint. More research needs to be conducted to establish a causal link between job dissatisfaction and MSDs. Iss246 (talk) 00:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
No, it is job dissatisfaction which research has indicated. Further the work related hazards you have included in the article have been shown by some studies to have no effect on many types of MSDs? We should not be focusing on work related hazards. I will add a number of other more reliable sources eg from world health organisation (WHO) instead. You are perhaps mistaking occupational stress with psychosocial factors?Mrm7171 (talk) 00:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Also, the whole area obviously needs further research. The mechanisms behind the causal relationships found are very much theoretical, that's why I added to the article a range of other theories, as psyc12 had only included muscle tension for some reason?Mrm7171 (talk) 00:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
Included a couple of examples and reliable source. Restructured paragraph slightly, without deleting any other editor's work or references. Will continue refining these sections,Mrm7171 (talk) 01:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
    • ^ Sprigg, C. A., Stride, C. B., Wall, T. D., Holman, D. J., & Smith, P. R. (2007). Work characteristics, musculoskeletal disorders, and the mediating role of psychological strain: A study of call center employees. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1456-1466.