Fifteen articles that described 10 studies were included in the review (n appeared to be approximately 2,474): three RCTs (n=350); four cohort studies with control groups (n=2,015 maximum); and three uncontrolled cohort studies (n=109). Eight articles had a quality score of 32 or more (medium to very high).
Early return to work/modified work: One study (described in four articles) reported that the intervention was associated with decreasing rates of back injuries and lost-time back injuries, and reduced pain and disability (one controlled cohort study).
Occupational interventions: One study reported that intervention was associated with 2.4 times faster return to regular work compared with the usual care group (95% CI to 1.19, 4.89; one RCT, n=130) and decreasing pain and disability demonstrated by a significantly lower Oswestry Disability Questionnaire score (p=0.02).
Ergonomics (exercises and lumbar support): Studies reported that interventions were associated with satisfaction in most workers (one cohort study), effective return to work after more than 200 days of sick leave (one cohort study), a significant reduction in pain intensity (one RCT), complete recovery in 27 out of 30 workers (one cohort study) and perceived benefit from lumbar support (1 cohort study).
Exercises and workplace visits: Studies reported that interventions were associated with a smaller number of workers with daily pain (one RCT) and a significantly lower number of lost days compared to control (one controlled cohort study).
Supervisor involvement in return to work: One cohort study reported that interventions were associated with significantly increased knowledge, more initiations of ergonomic improvements, more contact with and follow-up of sick-listed personnel.