International Journal of General Medicine

and Pharmacy (IJGMP)

ISSN(P): 2319-3999; ISSN(E): 2319-4006
Vol. 3, Issue 5, Sep 2014, 61- 68
© IASET

A MODEL OF PREDICTORS FOR WORK RELATED LOW BACK PAIN AMONG

MALAYSIAN NURSES WORKING AT HOSPITAL UNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA

SAMER KHADER ALNAWAJHA1, WAN AASIM WAN ADNAN2, MOHD NAZHARI MOHD NAWI3 &
CHE RABIAAH MOHAMED4
1,4
Degree Programme in Nursing, School of Health Sciences,
Universiti Sains, Pulau Penang, Malaysia
2
BRAI Network Centre for Neurocognitive Science, School of Health Sciences,
Universiti Sains, Pulau Penang, Malaysia
3
Environmental and Occupational Health Programme, School of Health Sciences,
Universiti Sains, Pulau Penang, Malaysia

ABSTRACT

Work related Low back pain (LBP) is distressing and is a major cause of work-related disability among nurses.
The main objective of this study is to provide a model of predictors for work related LBP among Malaysian nurses
working at Hospital University Sains Malaysia (Hospital USM). Validated interview questionnaire was applied with a
stratified random sample among an equal (300) nurses working at HUSM through a cross sectional design.
SPSS® (v20) was used for data analysis through multiple logistic regression (MLR). The results of MLR showed that the
nurses who were assuming incorrect body posture have increased odds of having LBP by 243 times than who did not
(p<0.001), nurses without work organization strategies have increased odds of having LBP by 32 times than who did not
(p<0.001). The nurses who perceived health status as poor have increased odds of having LBP by 0.072 times than who did
not (p=0.040). Null hypothesis for Hosmer Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test of the model is fit. Classification table showed
97.3% of cases were correctly predicted, the model can accurately discriminate 98.0% of the cases. The study provided a
model Predictors of work related LBP reasonably fits well, it will be utilized for further in-depth studies in relation to LBP.

KEYWORDS: Low Back Pain, Model, Nurses

INTRODUCTION

Low back pain (LBP) disability is a serious and costly problem that affects the nursing profession
(McAdams et al., 2011). LBP is reportedly an escalating health issue among individuals worldwide, with a lifetime
prevalence that ranges from 60% to 90% (Brennan et al., 2007; Burdorf and Jansen, 2006). LBP predominantly affects the
working population in developed and developing nations, leaving a number of individuals disabled (Roffey et al., 2010;
Sanya and Ogwumike, 2005; Naude et al., 2009). Nurses report the highest level of work-related back injuries
(Burdorf and Jansen, 2006). This prevalence is attributed to the great amount of physical work involved in their profession,
such as the manual handling and transfer of patients and occupation-related psychological stress (Vieira et al., 2006; Yip,
2004). The problem of the ignorance of this issue will provide bad consequences on Hospital USM. These consequences
will be on the nurse, patint and on the hospital. The consequences to the nurses include, but not limited to, guilt and blame
for the injury, chronic pain, fear of re-injury or permanent disability, deleterious impact on quality of life, and unwanted

www.iaset.us [email protected]
62 Samer Khader Alnawajha, Wan Aasim Wan Adnan, Mohd Nazhari Mohd Nawi & Che Rabiaah Mohamed

career changes. The consequences for the patient include, but not limited to, deterioration in the quality of care and patient
comfort and safety. The consequences for the hospital include, but not limited to, productivity, recruitment and retention of
nurses, and increased organizational costs (Nelson, 2006).

On the other hand, the direct and indirect costs of LBP that may be happen to Hospital USM nurses, it leads to
reduced income and quality of life, decrease productivity, and leads to absenteeism of nurses and it is reponsible for a
major economic burden on the health care system (Henchoz et al., 2010) because of poor working conditions and rising
demands leading to back pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Work related LBP in this study was defined as the proportion of the nurses with LBP that extends from below the
scapulas and to both legs at anytime of their work over 12 months. The design for this study was a quantitative analytical
cross-sectional which involved a questionnaire regarding work related LBP that evaluates different potential etiologic
factors that are related to the specific disease and calculates the prevalence and the associated factors. Based on inclusion
and exclusion criteria, 300 nurses were selected from the above-mentioned hospital as participants. This hospital was
selected because it is a tertiary referral center located in the health campus of the university and is a teaching hospital with
an 800-bed capacity.

Stratified random sampling was applied on the respondents who met the inclusion criteria. The population was
divided into different strata based on homogeneity. Each strata represented ward in Hospital USM.
The questionnaire consisted of seven sections which was developed and retested under factor analysis using SPSS software
version 20,

• Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents,

• Workload status of the nurses,

• Questions related to LBP,

• Associated factors of LBP,

• Assessment of work environment characteristics,

• Assessment of general knowledge of nurses regarding LBP, and

• Suggestions to reduce LBP from the nurses’ point of view. The Oswestry LBP scale was used to describe the
severity of pain. The associated factors of work-related LBP were categorized into five groups, based on the
results of previous studies (Ando et al., 2006).

RESULTS
Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Sample
The study participants consisted of 300 nurses, 278 (92.7%) were females and 22 (7.3%) were males.
There were 288 (96.0%) of the study participants were Malays, 10 (3.3%) were Chinese and only 2 nurses (0.7%) were
Indians. Regarding age groups, 110 (36.7%) were from (23 – 30) years and 97 (32.3%) were from (31 – 40) years.
The majority (76.7%) of the study participants were married, 56 (18.7%) were single, 9 (3.0%) were widowed.
Based on the qualifications; 246 (82.0%) of the study participants were from diploma holders, and 27 (9.0%) having

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.9545 Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

A Model of Predictors for Work Related Low Back Pain among Malaysian Nurses Working at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia 63

degree certificate. Moreover, the majority 287 (95.7%) of the study participants were working as staff nurses and 8 (2.7%)
were working as head nurses. The table also shows that there were 252 (84.0%) of study participants perceived their health
status as good, 42 (14.0%) perceived it as moderate and only 6 (2.0%) perceived their health status as bad.
The majority 145 (48.3%) of the study participants were dissatisfied from their job, 69 (23.0%) were satisfied from the job
and 86 (28.7%) were moderately satisfied. Regarding body mass index; the majority 155 (51.7%) having normal BMI, 87
(29.0%) are overweight (pre-obese), 38 (12.7%) are obese and 20 (6.7%) are underweight (Table 1).

Table 1: Socio-Demographic Characteristics of the Sample (N=300)

Variable N (%)
Male 22 7.3
Gender
Female 278 92.7
Malay 288 96.0
Race Chinese 10 3.3
Indian 2 0.7
(23 – 30) years 110 36.7
(31 – 40) years 97 32.3
Age Group
(41 – 50) years 66 22.0
(51 – 57) years 27 9.0
Single 56 18.7
Married 230 76.7
Marital Status
Divorced 5 1.7
Widow/Widower 9 3.0
Master degree 1 0.3
Degree 27 9.0
Qualification
Diploma 246 82.0
Nursing certificate 26 8.6
Nursing Supervisor 2 7.0
Head nurse 8 2.7
Job Title Staff nurse 287 95.7
Nursing assistant 2 0.7
Community nurse 1 0.3
Good 252 84.0
Perceived Health Status Moderate 42 14.0
Bad 6 2.0
Satisfied 69 23.0
Job Satisfaction Moderately satisfied 86 28.7
Dissatisfied 145 48.3
Underweight 20 6.7
Normal 155 51.7
BMI
Over weight (pre-obese) 87 29.0
Obese 38 12.7
The results showed that there are 160 (53.3%) of nurses were complaining of work related LBP during the past 12
months (period prevalence). Multiple logistic regression analysis was employed to predict the probability that a nurse in
Hospital USM would suffer from LBP. Variables with p<0.25 by bivariate analysis and which applied to all nurses were
selected as predictors. They were (gender, age, ward, occupation, duration of work in the present word, perceived health
status, work posture, work control, work organization, patient condition, work psychosocial factors, sufficient working area
in nursing station, sufficient recording area in nursing station, enough lighting, good ventilation, comfortable chairs, much
furniture, the height of working tables, disks, machines, crowded work place and general knowledge of nurses about back
safety measures, receiving any training course about safety during nursing education and receiving any educational course

www.iaset.us [email protected]
64 Samer Khader Alnawajha, Wan Aasim Wan Adnan, Mohd Nazhari Mohd Nawi & Che Rabiaah Mohamed

regarding occupational health during study).

Table 2 shows that the nurses who are assuming bad body posture during their work such as frequent bending
forward or half sitting, much static work posture, frequent lifting and handling of objects and frequent repetitive work
using shoulders, arms, hands or fingers have increased odds of having work related LBP by 85.952 times than nurses who
don’t (p<0.001).

The table also shows that the nurses who don’t have work organization strategies such as extra work due to poor
physical condition of colleagues, work after sick leave, maternity leave, and childcare leave, difficulties in acting on
one's own ideas, difficult human relations at work, lack of frank discussion about work problems, responsibilities other
than tasks at work, role ambiguity in the workplace, inexperienced in handling tasks and many admissions and discharges
have increased odds of having work related LBP by 34.414 times than nurses who don’t (p<0.001).
The nurses who perceived health status as a bad have increased odds of having work related LBP by 0.066 times than
nurses who don’t (p<0.05)

None of the interactions are significant, therefore weren’t included in the model. Multicollinearity was checked
by linear regression by looking at VIF for the variables (body posture, work control and good ventilation in the work
place), all the values were less than 10, which is acceptable (Norsa’adah Bachok, 2011). Model fitness was checked by
Hosmer Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test, classification table and area under ROC (Receiver operating characteristics) curve.
The null hypothesis for Hosmer Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test of the model is fit, p value is 0.805 which is not
significant. Classification table shows 97.3% of cases are predicted correctly whether they have work related LBP or not.
The area under the curve of ROC is 0.980, the model can accurately discriminate 98.0% of the cases
(it is significantly discriminate more than half of the cases).

Table 2: Final Model of the Factors Associated with 12 Months Work Related
LBP among Nurses Working in Hospital USM (N=300)
Crude ORa Adjusted ORa Wald Statistics
Variables P Valueb
(95%CI) (95%CI) (df)
Good 1.00 1.00
Perceived Health 6.467(0.901,
Moderate 2.00(1.006, 3.977) 3.448 (1) 0.063
Status 46.521)
0.066(0.005,
Bad 5.00(0.576, 43.407) 4.223 (1) 0.040
0.882)
No 1.00 1.00
Factor (A):Work
995.428(252.424, 85.952(12.480,
Postures Yes 20.463 (1) 0.000
3925, 451) 591.988)
No 1.00 1.00
Factor (C):Work
573.750(180.762, 34.414(5.559,
Organization Yes 14.472 (1) 0.000
1821.115) 045)
a
Simple logistic regression, bMultiple logistic regression

The model reasonably fits well. Model assumptions are met. There are no interaction and multicollinearity
problems

DISCUSSIONS

The current study focused on nurses and nursing care because nurses are more prone to work-related LBP than the
general population. The results of this study are consistent with those of Sopajareeya et al. (2009), who determined the

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.9545 Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

A Model of Predictors for Work Related Low Back Pain among Malaysian Nurses Working at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia 65

prevalence and risk factors of LBP among nurses in a Thailand public hospital and showed a 61.5% prevalence rate of LBP
based on the nurses’ report in the previous 12 months. Given that Sopajareeya et al. (2009) conducted their study at a
Thailand public hospital, their results support our results as our study was conducted at a universiti hospital and a similar
sample was investigated, that is, the participants were prone to the same risks and dangers during work.

The results of the multiple logistic regression analysis show that three factors contributed to the occurrence of 12
months of work-related LBP among Malaysian nurses working in Hospital USM. The three factors are perceived health
status, work posture, and work organization. Sikiru and Hanifa (2010) revealed that gender and poor knowledge of back
care and ergonomics are major factors fo work related LBP. In the study of Sopajareeya (2012) in a Thailand public
hospital, the results of logistic regression analysis show that the moving of patients in bed without assistance and the lack
of back muscle exercise were the significant risk factors that caused LBP among the nurses.

The results of our study show that poor body posture is critical to the occurrence of work-related LBP among
nurses. This finding can be attributed to the fact that teaching proper body posture, the creation of occupational settings
that are “spine-friendly, ” and other health care settings are needed to lower the suffering of the nursing staff and this
indicates that the nurses are working hardly without evidence on how to work safely without breaking their backs.
The factor of work posture includes frequent bending forward or half sitting, high static work posture, frequent lifting and
handling of objects, and frequent repetitive work using shoulders, arms, hands, or fingers. These results show the
positive correlation between lower back disorders and work-related awkward postures (Hoogendoorn et al., 1999).
This posture exposure increases the risk of back disorder.

Static work posture is a risk factor associated with the tremendous increase in the number of static work because
of technological innovations (e.g., office work and control tasks). Hales and Bernard (1996) concluded that prolonged
sitting is a potential risk factor for the development of LBP. This factor can be attributed to the process during sitting,
which results in a prolonged compression force that may increase the risk of disc problems and to the continuous activity
of some type-I motor units of (back) muscles that may contribute to the development of fatigue (Videman et al., 2005).
Several investigations mentioned an increased risk for low back disorders when jobs have to be performed in a sitting
position. These jobs increase the development of new types of chairs that promote “dynamic sitting”. A dynamic sitting
pattern that can have a positive prevention effect on work-related LBP is created by allowing movement in the back
support and/or chair seat. Conflicting results are also mentioned in several reviews (i.e., Hoogendoorn et al., 1999).

Work organizational factors that affect the occurrence of work-related LBP include extra work due to the poor
physical condition of colleagues, work after sick leave that changes the health status of the nurse during the work itself,
difficulties in acting on one’s own ideas, difficult human relations at work that have a positive impact on the psychosocial
aspect of the individual, lack of frank discussion about work problems, many admissions and discharges during nursing
work, responsibilities other than the tasks at work, role ambiguity in the workplace that confuses the nurses in their work
area, and inexperience in handling tasks.

These findings are in accordance with those of Sikiru and Hanifa (2010), who showed that poor knowledge of
back care ergonomics is a risk factor of work-related LBP. The eight factors associated to current complain of work-related
LBP among nurses include work posture, work organization, crowded work place, height of working tables, lack of
good ventilation, lack of mechanical devices for patient lifting, lack of wheels and other devices to move heavy

www.iaset.us [email protected]
66 Samer Khader Alnawajha, Wan Aasim Wan Adnan, Mohd Nazhari Mohd Nawi & Che Rabiaah Mohamed

equipment, and overtime hours. Results show that the lack of control over work is a risk factor. Many unplanned work and
the lack of organization during work lead to the confusion and stress of nurses. Excessive different tasks and
responsibilities lead to a heavier than usual workload on the human body, resulting in a lack of rest during work.
A general consensus exists regarding the association of LBP and heavy work (Bernard et al., 1997).

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The study produced a biologically sound models for the predicting factors associated with work-related LBP
among Malaysian nurses. The present study fills the research gap by identifying the relationship between working overtime
and severity of pain among Asian nurses. Previous studies failed to identify the significant correlations between working
hours and severity of back pain.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study was under the supervision and support of Dr. Che Rabiaah Binti Mohamed. Thanks is extended to the
nurses and who participated in the study. This study study was supported financially by Universiti Sains Malaysia.

REFERENCES

1. McAdams, M. T., Kerwin, J. J., Olivo, V., & Goksel, H.A. (2011). National assessment of the occupational safety
and health workforce. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Research Boulevard Rockville,
Maryland.

2. Brennan, G., Shafat, A., Donncha, C., & Vekins, C. (2007). Lower back pain in physically demanding college
academic programs: A questionnaire-based study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 8(8), 67-75.

3. Burdorf, A., & Jansen, JP. (2006). Predicting the long-term course of low back pain and its consequences for
sickness absence and associated work disability. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(8), 522-529.

4. Sanya, A., & Ogwumike, O. (2005). Low back pain prevalence amongst industrial workers in the private sector in
Oyo state, Nigeria. African Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences, 34(3), 245-249.

5. Naude, B., W. Mudzi, M. V. Mamabolo & P. J. Becker. (2009). Low back pain among hospital employees in
Gauteng, South Africa: Point prevalence and associated factors. Occupational Health Southern Africa, 24-30.

6. Vieira, ERm, Kumar, S., Coury, HJ., & Narayan, Y. (2006) Low back problems and possible improvements in
nursing jobs. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 55(1), 79-89.

7. Yip, V.Y.B. (2004). New low back pain in nurses: Work activities, work stress, and sedentary lifestyle. Journal
of Advanced Nursing, 46(4), 430-440.

8. Nelson, A. (2006). Safe patient handling and movement. Springer Publishing Company, Inc. New York, NY
10036–8002. USA.

9. Henchoz, Y., Pinget, C., Wasserfallen, J., Paillex, R., Goumoens, P., Norberg, M., and Kai-Lik So, A. (2010).
Cost-Utility Analysis of A Three-Month Exercise Programme Vs Usual Care Following Multidisciplinary
Rehabilitation for Chronic Low Back Pain. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine. 42(9), 846–852.

Impact Factor (JCC): 2.9545 Index Copernicus Value (ICV): 3.0

A Model of Predictors for Work Related Low Back Pain among Malaysian Nurses Working at Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia 67

10. Norsa’adah Bachok. (2011). Multivariate analysis regression. Universiti Sains Malaysia, Farzwan Enterprise,
Kelantan, Malaysia.

11. Sopajareeya, C., Viwatwongkasem, C., Lapvongwatana, P., Hong, O., & Kalampakorn, S. (2009). Prevalence and
risk factors of low back pain among nurses in a Thai public hospital. Department of Public Health Nursing,
Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Journal of the Medical Association of
Thailand, 92 (Suppl7), S93-99.

12. Sikiru, L., & Hanifa, S. (2010). Prevalence and risk factors of low back pain among nurses in a typical Nigerian
hospital. African Health Sciences Journal, 10(1), 26-30.

13. Sopajareeya, C., Viwatwongkasem, C., Lapvongwatana, P., Hong, O., & Kalampakorn, S. (2009). Prevalence and
risk factors of low back pain among nurses in a Thai public hospital. Department of Public Health Nursing,
Faculty of Public Health, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. Journal of the Medical Association of
Thailand, 92 (Suppl7), S93-99.

14. Hoogendoorn, WE., Poppel, MNM., Bongers, PM., Koes, BW., & Bouter, LM. (1999). Physical load during work
and leisure time as risk factors for back pain, Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health,
25(5), 387-403.

15. Videman, T., Ojaja rvi A., Riihimaki, H., & Troup, JD. (2005) Low back pain among nurses: a follow-up
beginning at entry to the nursing school. Spine, 30(20), 2334-2341.

16. Bernard, BP., & Fine, LJ. (1997) [Online]. Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors. U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services. Cincinnati, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[Accessed April10th, 2013]. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ergosci1.html.

www.iaset.us [email protected]