Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
3,233-237
Standardised Nordic
questionnaires for the analysis
of musculoskeletal symptoms
I. Kuorinka*, B. Jonsson t, A. Kilbom**, H. Vinterberg t t , F. Biering-S6rensen~,
G. Andersson and K. J6rgensen 7r
*Institute of Occupational Health, Department of Physiology, Helsinki, Finland;
tNational Board of Occupational Safety and Health, Work Physiology Unit, Ume/l, Sweden;
**National Board of Occupational Safety and Health, Work Physiology Unit, ResearchDepartment, Solna, Sweden;
ttDepartment of Rheumatology, County Hospital, Hiller6d, Denmark;
Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark;
~Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush-Presbyterian- St. Luke's Medical Center, Chicago, USA;
rrAugust Krogh Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
Background
Musculoskeletal disorders and symptoms in a working
population are common, occurring predominantly in the
low back (see review by Troup and Edwards, 1985), neck
and upper limbs (e g, Armstrong et al, 1982; Waris, 1979;
Oxenburgh etal, 1985). Mechanical factors contribute to
the development of these problems and in general influence
symptoms (Kilbom et al, 1986; Maeda et al, 1979; Pope
et al, 1984). To help define the problem and its relationship
to work factors, increasing interest has been directed in
many countries to the development of methods to estimate
and record musculoskeletal symptoms. Questionnaires have
proved to be the most obvious means of collecting the
necessary data.
Standardisation is needed in the analysis and recording of
the musculoskeletal symptoms. Otherwise it is difficult to
compare the results from different studies. This
consideration was the main motive for a Nordic group to
start developing standardised questionnaires for the analysis
of musculoskeletal symptoms. Even a modest degree of
standardisation was regarded as useful. We found that the
major part of most questionnaires used in previous studies
could have been easily comparable, but that the individual
questions often differed in trivial details from study to study
and thus impeded the comparison of the results. It was
Applied Ergonomics
Sept~ml~r 1987
233
Questionnaire about
trouble with the
locomotive organs
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
l~,
,1.1,.,
r,,:,,,
., ~.t
, L,r,t~ ~ a ~
d c n q {()Jr p r e s e n t t.~pe OT ~ O f ~ o
On average how ,'ar~
a w e e k 3o y o u w o , k "
~.
.ea~
ITI .n~'~
r{uR
~Qurs a ~eqk
A r e o , right f~arlae(l ( r
,I
eq~ h a q d e a
>
2~
rlghl handed
left h a n d e d
ii
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fig. 1
-2~-L
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
General questionnaire
The general questionnaire was designed to answer the
tbllowing question: "Do musculoskeletal troubles occur in
a given population, and if so, in what parts of the body are
they localised?" With this consideration in mind, a
questionnaire was constructed in which the human body
(viewed from the back) is divided into nine anatomical
regions. These regions were selected on the basis of two
criteria: regions where symptoms tend to accumulate, and
regions which are distinguishable from each other both by
the respondent and a health surveyor. The intentional choice
of the back aspect of the body leaves gaps when disorders
are located in the frontal part of the shoulder or on the
flexor side of the upper limbs. This choice has been made
because numerous possible causes of pain in the front part
of the body (abdominal and thoracical pains, etc) might
intermingle with the musculoskeletal pain in the upper
thorax. Preliminary observations seem to point out that
this choice does not significantly modify the response rates.
The verbal questions deal with each anatomical area in turn,
and inquire whether the respondent has, or has had, troubles
in the respective area during the preceding 12 months,
whether this pain is disabling and whether it is ongoing.
Fig. 1 shows the anatomical areas and the layout of the
questionnaire.
234
AppliedErgonomics September1987
HOw tO
P l e a s e a n s w e r b y p u t t i n g a c r o s s in t h e a p p r o p r i a t e b o x - - o n e c r o s s for
e a c h q u e s t i o n . You m a y b e in d o u b t a s to h o w to answer, b u t p l e a s e d o
y o u r b e s t anyway. P l e a s e a n s w e r e v e r y q u e s t i o n , e v e n if y o u h a v e n e v e r
h a d t r o u b l e in a n y p a r t of y o u r body,
l
Haveyouat a n y t i m e d u r i n g t h e l a l t 12 months had
trouble (ache, palm discomfort) in:
To be i m l ~ l l t l d onlyby t h o l e
who ~ had trou4ofe
your
//
ii
Neck
No 2
No
Yes
ehoulders
2
Yes, ,n the right shoulder
3
Yes, irl the tel/ shoulder
4
Yes in both shoulders
NO
'
~"iow
~c~
Yes
NO
Yes
NO
Yes
WRISTS/HANDS
2
3
4
No
Yes
I! 1
Elbows
NO
[ 1
i
NO
Yes
T
Wrists/hands
NO 2
3
4
HIPS/THIGHS
Yes
1I
Upper back
No 2
Yes
KNEES
No
No
Yes
NO
2 ;
Yes
iI
ij 1
NO
Yes
NO
Yes
[
I 1
No
Yes
No
Yes
i
] 1
NO
Yes
NO
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
= =
ANKLES/FEET
Sex
year
1
LOWBACK
month day
Female
Male
~]
months
hours a weak
kg
L i
cm
1
2
reduce
No
2 f: Yes
J
~
. .
right-handed
leh handed
Have you ~
been hospitalized because of
low back trouble?
1 I No
Yes
2
3
4
No
Yes
7 Haw you ~
INmn by a doctor, phy~mtherapist, chiropractor or other such person
because of lOW back trouble during the felt
12 men/hi?
1
2
3
4
5,
z
47
O days
1--7 days
8--30 days
More than 30 days, but not every day
E~ry day
L~
No
2 [] Yes
Fig. 2
0 days
~--7 days
8--30 days
More Ihan 30 days
1L
NO
Yes
Applied Ergonomics
September 1987
235
~.lt
Sex
mor,th oar
Femste
Mal,
month~
rl0urs a wee~
k~}
cm
t
2
r~ght-handed
left.handed
Acknowledgement
The study was supported by the Nordic Council of
Ministers, Oslo.
Fig. 3
Fleiss, J.L.
References
Anon
Anon
1960 (b) British Medical Journal, Medical Research Council's
Committee on the Aetiology of Chronic Bronchitis:
Instructions for the use of the questionnaire on
respiratory symptoms.
236
AppliedErgonomics September1987
NECK
SHOULDER
to ~
the q~eallonnaim: By neck trouble is meant ache,
beJn or dmcomfoM in the shaded area. Please c~lceof tale on thin area.
ignorthg any trouble you may have in a d ~
pans of the hody There
is a separate questionnade for shoofder trouble
How to m
the q w l t k m m l m : 8y shoulder troubte m mear~ acda,
pain of d~comfoll fo me shadad area Pfelme concemrale o~ thts area.
~nonng any ~.ble you may dave in adtacem pare of the ho(~/ There
is a separste queslionnawe for neCk trouble.
Pleaseanswer by putting a Cross m the a~or Oys~ste be= - - one cross
for each questkm Yeu may be m douof as to how to anst,~r, PUt pJesse
do your best anyway,
NO
E:
2 :: Yes
Have you ~
1L
NO
No
2 :: Yes
or
What ts the ~
lingth of time that you
bawl had neck trouble during the l i l t 12
momhl?
1 E; O deys
2 r[[ 1--7 days
3 ~ 8--30 days
4 E~ More then 30 days, but not every day
5 : E~l~y day
If you a n ~ m d 0 ~
answer the q u e ~ n s
Io Question 4, do not
5--8
Yes
~ :
NO
Yes
10 Have you ~
hurt your shoulder in an
Iceklent't
1
No
2
Yes, my r~ght should~
3
Yes, my ~efl shoulder
4
~ . both shou,,~,,,.~
No
Yes
Yes
L~_
NO
r i
Yes
3
4
No
b L e i ~ m activity ")
1
0 days
2 ~ 1--7 days
3
8--30 days
4
More than 30 days
[]
2 :: Yes
NO
b Leisure activity?
acck~r~
1--7 days
8 - - 3 0 days
More than 30 days
[1
No
2
3 i
4 i
~.J
Sinclair, M.A.
1975 Applied Ergonomics, 6, 73-80. Questionnaire design.
Troup, J.D.G., and Edwards, F.C.
1985 Manual Handling. A review paper. Health and Safety
Executive.
Van Wely, P.
1970 Applied Ergonomics, 1, 258-261. Design and
disease.
Wads, P.
1979 Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health,
5, Supplement 3, 3-14. Occupational cervicobrachial
syndromes: A review.
237