Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2008

Open Access 01-09-2008

Pain Response of Healthy Workers Following a Functional Capacity Evaluation and Implications for Clinical Interpretation

Authors: Remko Soer, Johan W. Groothoff, Jan H. B. Geertzen, Cees P. van der Schans, David D. Reesink, Michiel F. Reneman

Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Issue 3/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and aim Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs) are used to quantify physical aspects of work capacity. Safety is a critical issue for clinical use of an FCE. Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) are known to report a temporary increase in pain following an FCE, but it is not known whether this increase is a normal pain response to FCE. It is currently unknown how healthy subjects respond to an FCE and whether this should be interpreted as a normal reaction after physical exercise. This study was performed to quantify the intensity, duration, location and nature of the pain response following an FCE in healthy subjects and to compare this pain response with the pain response of patients with CLBP from a previous study. Methods A total of 197 healthy working subjects between 20 and 60 years of age volunteered to participate in this study. All subjects performed a 12-item FCE. Pain response was measured by a self-constructed Pain Response Questionnaire (PRQ). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the pain response following an FCE. Mann–Whitney and t-tests were performed to compare the data from this study with data of patients with CLBP from a previous study. Results About 82% of all subjects reported a pain response following the FCE. The intensity of the pain response after 24 h post FCE was a median of 3.0 on a numeric rating scale (0–10). About 78% of all pain was reducible to muscle soreness. Pain was most often reported in the upper legs (51%), the lower back (38%) the shoulders (37%) and upper arms (36%). Symptoms decreased to pre-FCE levels in a mean of 3 days. The pain response of 2 subjects (1%) lasted for 3 weeks. The intensity and duration of the pain response of healthy subjects was not significantly different from the response of patients with CLBP. Conclusion Pain response of 99% of all subjects who reported a pain response was interpreted as normal. It was concluded that a pain response following an FCE can be expected in healthy subjects and that this pain response is a normal musculoskeletal reaction. The pain response of patients with CLBP resembles the pain response of healthy subjects.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Hart DL, Isernhagen SJ, Matheson LN. Guidelines for functional capacity evaluation of people with medical conditions. JOSPT. 1993;18(6):682–6.PubMed
2.
Gouttebarge V, Wind H, Kuijer PPFM, Frings-Dresen MHW. A systematic review with reference to Blankenship System, Ergos Work Simulator, Ergo-kit and Isernhagen Work System. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2004;77:527–37.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Gibson L, Strong J. Safety issues in functional capacity evaluation: findings from a trial of a new approach for evaluating clients with chronic back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(2):237–51.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Matheson L, Mooney V, Grant J, Leggett S, Kenny K. Standardized evaluation of work capacity. J Musculoskeletal Rehab. 1998;6:249–6.CrossRef
5.
Matheson LN, Mooney V, Grant JE, Affleck M, Hall H, Melles T, Lichter RL, McIntosh G. A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 1—Development and reliability testing. Spine. 1995;20(19):2119–29.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Reneman MF, Kuijer W, Brouwer S, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Groothoff JW, Geertzen JH, Dijkstra PU. Symptom increase following a functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain: an explorative study of safety. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(2):197–205.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Kuijer W, Dijkstra PU, Brouwer S, Reneman MF, Groothoff JW, Geertzen JH. Safe lifting in patients with chronic low back pain: comparing FCE lifting task and NIOSH lifting guideline. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(4):579–89.PubMedCrossRef
8.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Applications manual for the revised NIOSH lifting equation. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health; 1994.
9.
Isernhagen SJ. Work injury, management and prevention. Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA: Aspen publishers, Inc; 1988.
10.
Powers SK, Howley ET. Exercise physiology. Theory and application to fitness and performance. 4 ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2001.
11.
Cheung K, Hume P, Maxwell L. Delayed onset muscle soreness: treatment strategies and performance factors. Sports Med. 2003;33(2):145–64.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Shephard RJ. PAR-Q, Canadian home fitness test and exercise screening alternatives. Sports Med. 1988;5(3):185–95.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ. Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci. 1992;17(4):338–345.PubMed
14.
Matheson LN, Mooney V, Holmes D, Leggett S, Grant JE, Negri S, Holmes B. A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 2––Reactivity in a patient sample. Spine. 1995;20(19):2130–34.PubMed
15.
Borg G. Psychophysical scaling with applications in physical work and the perception of exertion. Scan J Work Environ Health. 1990;16(1):55–8.
16.
Borg G. Borg’s perceived exertion and pain scales. Campaign, IL, USA: Human Kinetics; 1998.
17.
Reneman MF, Brouwer S, Meinema A, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Groothoff JW. Test–retest reliability of the Isernhagen work systems functional capacity evaluation in healthy adults. J Occup Rehabil. 2004;14(4):295–305.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Soer R, Gerrits EH, Reneman MF. Test–retest reliability of a WRULD functional capacity evaluation in healthy adults. Work. 2006;26(3):273–80.PubMed
19.
Bruce RA. Exercise testing and training of apparently healthy individuals: a handbook for physicians. New York, USA: American Heart Association; 1972.
20.
Williamson A, Hoggart B. A review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(7):798–804.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Reesink DD, Soer R, Reneman MF. Self-reported physical response after completing a functional capacity evaluation in healthy subject––a pilot study. Center for Movement Sciences, University of Groningen; 2006. Unpublished thesis.
22.
Zee van der KI, Sanderman R. Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de RAND-36. Article in Dutch. Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands. 1993. ISBN 90-72156-60-9.
23.
Picavet HS, Schouten JS. Musculoskeletal pain in the Netherlands: prevalences, consequences and risk groups, the DMC(3)-study. Pain 2003;102(1–2):167–78.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Poos MJJC, Gool van CH. Prevalentie, incidentie en sterfte naar leeftijd en geslacht. Article in Dutch. Nationaal Kompas Volksgezondheid version 3.10.1 2007. RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
25.
Soer R, Poels BJJ, Geertzen JHB, Reneman MF. A comparison of two lifting assessment approaches in patients with chronic low back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16:639–46.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Pain Response of Healthy Workers Following a Functional Capacity Evaluation and Implications for Clinical Interpretation
Authors
Remko Soer
Johan W. Groothoff
Jan H. B. Geertzen
Cees P. van der Schans
David D. Reesink
Michiel F. Reneman
Publication date
01-09-2008
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Issue 3/2008
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-008-9132-5

Other articles of this Issue 3/2008

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 3/2008 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Including Injured Workers Without Compensated Time Loss in Cox Regression Models: Analyzing Time Loss Using All Available Data

OriginalPaper

Is Workstyle a Mediating Factor for Pain in the Upper Extremity Over Time?

OriginalPaper

Self-Perceived Musculoskeletal Complaints: Relationship to Time Use in Women Homemakers in Hong Kong

OriginalPaper

The Role of Perceived Injustice in the Experience of Chronic Pain and Disability: Scale Development and Validation

OriginalPaper

The Effect of a Job Placement and Support Program for Workers with Musculoskeletal Injuries: A Randomized Control Trial (RCT) Study

OriginalPaper

The Vocational Continuum: How to Make Sense of Vocational Outcomes After Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Chronic Pain Sufferers