1986; Klußmann et al. 2010; Viikari-Juntura et al. 1996), comparison of short working sequences (Burdorf and Laan 1991; Jensen et al. 2000), or inadequate methods for click here objective exposure
assessment with respect to dynamic knee-straining tasks, for example screening methods with observation intervals of 20 or 30 s, respectively (Burdorf and Laan 1991; Pope et al. 1998). All these studies analysed workers’ self-reports given immediately after the examination, thus disregarding long-term effects as they appear in retrospective studies. Apart from such memory effects, certain personal circumstances may also have an influence on workers’ assessment behaviour (recall bias). For example, some studies seem to support the impact of musculoskeletal disorders related to the examined risk factors on patients’ ability to estimate their selleck exposure exactly (Balogh et al. 2004; d’Errico et al. 2007). Patients may tend to overestimate their exposure in contrast to people without such disorders (differential misclassification bias). For these reasons, the aim of the current
study was to examine the validity of self-reporting of work-related knee loading (i.e. MK0683 ic50 kneeling, squatting, and crawling) by comparing them to the results gained by objective measurement, by analysing a sufficient study sample with subjects from several occupations, by conducting a two-stage survey (survey with six-month follow-up), and by examining the possible influence of current knee complaints on the accuracy of assessment in order to find out whether they may lead to differential misclassification. The study
is based on a scientific report made on behalf of the German Social Accident Insurance to investigate occupational cAMP kneeling and squatting in different occupations (Ditchen et al. 2010). Methods Design and study sample As our study focussed on occupational knee loading in the construction and industrial sector, the following 20 occupations supposed to include knee-straining tasks were observed in this study (with numbers of subjects): installers (45), roofers (29), painters and decorators (20), tilers (19), parquet layers (19), screed layers (8), floor layers (9), pavers (7), reinforcing ironworkers (6), shipyard workers (5), mould makers (4), stone layers (4), tarp makers (4), welders (3), pipe layers (3), truck mechanics (2), electricians (1), steel builders (1), and assemblers (1). Recruitment of the 110 participating companies was conducted by members of the responsible social accident insurance. As study participants, 223 male craftsmen volunteered for field measurements. All of them were fit for work. For the current analysis, 33 data sets had to be excluded because of incomplete data sets (e.g. malfunction of video or measuring system), incomplete questionnaire, or lack of German language skills (Fig. 1), so 190 (=85.2 %) subjects remained for initial assessment. Their mean age was 35.0 years (SD, 11.