Abstract
Background: Approximately 1.71 billion individuals are suffering from musculoskeletal disorders, universally. It is evidenced that musculoskeletal conditions are the top influential global factors resulting in disability. This condition has affected many employees, resulting in activity restriction and absenteeism from work. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the prevalence and risk factors of Low Back Pain (LBP) among telecommunications employees based in Johannesburg, Gauteng.
Methods: A cross-sectional study was used by issuing a self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire was circulated to all 74 telecommunication employees, of which 52 (70.3%) employees participated in the study. The semi-structured questionnaire was issued electronically. The questionnaire contained demographic, personal and job-related factors. A chi-square test was used to ascertain the relationship between the possible work-related determinants of LBP. The data was analysed using IBM SPSS version 28.0 software. Additionally, an observational risk assessment survey was used to collect ergonomic risks related to tasks and posture (n=12), and Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) was used to evaluate the risks.
Results: The majority of participants were aged 30–45 years old (63.5%), of which 86.5% (n=45) were males and 13.5% (n=7) were females. The majority of the participants were black (94.2%). Office-based employees were relatively higher at 53.5% (n=28), as compared to radiofrequency employees at 30.8% (n=16) and civil employees at 5.4% (n=8). Majority of participants had more than 3 years of working experience (67.3%, n=35). Most participants were predominantly drinking alcohol (67.3%, 35/52). More than 50% of participants experienced backache (67.3%, n=35), however only a few participants used medication for LBP (31.9%, n=9). Less than 50% employees reported LBP while on duty (13.5%, n=14). The chi-square test was used to determine the p-values and significant differences, the findings showed no statistically significant difference between socio-demographic factors and LBP (p>0.05). The findings between work-related/ergonomics and LBP showed statistically significant in certain tasks that required an awkward wrist flexion angle (p=0.005); tasks that required an awkward back/hip flexion angle (p=0.026); and tasks that required reaching extreme distance (p=0.037). Correspondingly, there was a statistical difference between those who reported and those who did not report back pains while on duty as the result showed
vi
p=0.039 (p<0.05). When assessing ergonomic risks, the findings revealed that all the fieldwork technicians were within high to very high exposure domain, and majority of the office workers were within low to high exposure domain.
Conclusion: The study revealed no statistical significance between socio-demographic risk factors and LBP among participants. The statistical difference was observed between LBP and tasks that required an awkward wrist flexion angle; awkward back/hip flexion angle; and reaching extreme distance. It was discovered that work-related risk factors were the major influence of LBP among telecommunication employees. To support this evidence, the ergonomics risk assessment results revealed probability of LPB amongst telecommunication employees with high exposures observed among field employees. More studies are required to discover the prevalence of MSDs among telecommunication employees on a larger scale