Evidence Hub

Continental Umbrella Review and Meta-Analysis of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders Prevalence Among Healthcare Professionals

P. Gorce, J. Jacquier-Bret

Theoretical and Applied Ergonomics, 2025

100,211 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs) have a significant impact on healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to conduct an umbrella review and meta-analysis to examine the overall body area prevalence of WMSDs by continents, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Mendeley, PubMed/Medline, Science.gov, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar were screened without date limitation to identify relevant meta-analyses. The selection, quality appraisal, and data extraction process were performed independently by two reviewers. Ten meta-analyses were included from the 3853 unique records, for a total of 100,211 participants, including dentists, nurses, surgeons, and mixed healthcare professionals. High heterogeneity (Cochran’s Q test and I2 statistic) was observed. The largest number of meta-analyses was performed among nurses. Subgroup analysis by continent revealed an imbalance in the number of works, with Asia being the most documented. The analysis of prevalence rates was complete in Asia (overall and nine body areas), and partial in Europe (neck, shoulder, wrist) and Africa (lower back only). A ranking of the most exposed areas by continent was proposed. The lower back was the most exposed area (Africa: 54.5%; Asia: 56.6%). It would be relevant in future work to consider the numerous cross-sectional studies in order to improve subgroup analyses by continent and, thus, complete and strengthen the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 100,211 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free