Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Gary J Macfarlane a Unit of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, School of
Epidemiology and Health Sciences, Medical School, University of
Manchester, Manchester M13 9PT, b Arthritis Research Campaign Epidemiology
Unit, School of Epidemiology and Health Sciences, University of
Manchester
Correspondence to: G
J Macfarlane G.Macfarlane{at}man.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To determine the aetiology of forearm pain. In particular to determine the relative contribution of (a)
psychological factors, features of somatisation, and health anxiety and
behaviour, (b) work related mechanical factors, and
(c) work related psychosocial factors in the onset of
forearm pain.
The aetiology of forearm pain, and conditions of which
forearm pain is a feature, has been the subject of intensive
controversy.1 Some believe the pain to be integrally
related to exposure to physical factors such as frequent repetitive
movements of the upper limb, which can be common in some occupational
settings. Others believe that the pain is often a regional
manifestation of a fibromyalgia-type syndrome, and that it is
associated with high levels of psychological distress and features of
somatisation. At a workshop in 1997 (sponsored by the United Kingdom
Health and Safety Executive) to propose classification criteria for
upper limb syndromes that were potentially work related, one of the conditions identified was "diffuse forearm pain."2 But
owing to a lack of appropriately designed studies, little is known
about the occurrence (outside the clinic setting) or aetiology of
forearm pain. We aimed to determine the relative contribution of
(a) psychological factors, features of somatisation, and
health anxiety and behaviour, (b) work related mechanical
factors, and (c) work related psychosocial factors in the
onset of new forearm pain.
We conducted a two year prospective population-based cohort
study, with retrospective assessment of exposures in the workplace.
Cohort recruitment
Design:
2 year prospective population based cohort study, with retrospective assessment of exposures at work.
Setting:
Altrincham, Greater Manchester.
Participants:
1953 individuals aged 18-65 years.
Outcome measures:
Forearm pain of new onset.
Results:
At follow up, 105 (8.3%) participants
reported forearm pain of new onset lasting at least one day in the past month. Among these, 67% also reported shoulder pain, 65% back pain,
and 45% chronic widespread pain. Increased risks of onset were
associated with high levels of psychological distress (relative risk
2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.5 to 3.8), reporting at least two other
somatic symptoms (1.7, 0.95 to 3.0), and high scores on the illness
behaviour subscale of the illness attitude scales. The two work related
mechanical exposures associated with the highest risk of forearm pain
in the future were repetitive movements of the arm (4.1, 1.7 to 10) or
wrists (3.4, 1.3 to 8.7), whereas the strongest work related
psychosocial risk was dissatisfaction with support from colleagues or
supervisors (4.7, 2.2 to 10).
Conclusions:
Psychological distress, aspects of
illness behaviour, and other somatic symptoms are important predictors of onset of forearm pain in addition to work related psychosocial and
mechanical factors. Misleading terms such as "cumulative trauma disorder" or "repetitive strain injury," implying a single
uniform aetiology, should be avoided.
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Participants and methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
Participants and methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Participants and methods
Results
Discussion
References
Our study population comprised 1953 participants from a
cross sectional survey, conducted one year previously. The study has
been described in detail.3 Participants in the original
survey were adults aged 18 to 65 years, selected by simple random
sampling from the age and sex register of a general practice in
Altrincham, Greater Manchester. As over 95% of the United Kingdom population are registered with a general practitioner,4
this provided a convenient sampling frame for the local population. The
sociodemographic characteristics and age and sex structure of the study
area were similar to that of the United Kingdom population. The study
was approved by the local research ethics committee.
health anxiety and illness behaviour,7
(high scores on the scales indicated, respectively, high levels of
health related anxiety and an increased propensity to seek care when
experiencing symptoms); and (d) other syndromes of regional
and widespread pain. We identified participants with low back pain or
shoulder pain (experienced during the past month and lasting at least
one day) according to the body areas shaded in figure 1. We defined chronic widespread pain according to that used by the American College
of Rheumatology criteria for
fibromyalgia.8

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Definitions of pain according to site shaded
Follow up
At two years follow up we sent a postal questionnaire to
those respondents who had been free of forearm pain at baseline. We
posted up to two further questionnaires to non-respondents.
Pain status
We inquired about forearm pain experienced during the
previous month and lasting at least one day. Among participants
reporting forearm pain, we collected further information on date of
onset, radiation of the pain to other parts of the upper limb, health
seeking behaviour, and whether the pain was associated with disability.
Work related factors
To determine work related mechanical and psychosocial factors experienced at the time of a new onset of forearm pain, we
retrospectively assessed exposures at work. We obtained an occupational
history for all participants for the entire follow up period. For each
job we requested the date of starting and finishing, occupational
title, and detailed information on mechanical and psychosocial factors
experienced in the job. The questionnaires relating to mechanical and
psychosocial factors have been used in previous population
studies.9
Analysis
Participants free of forearm pain at baseline and who
provided data at both baseline and follow up were included in the
analyses. The risk of developing forearm pain associated with each
factor was calculated with Cox regression models and is expressed as
relative risk. The effects of occupational activities on the occurrence
of new episodes of forearm pain were analysed by an assessment of those
participants who were working during the follow up period. Among those
who reported forearm pain at follow up, occupational exposures were
defined as those carried out at the time of onset of the pain.
Participants who did not develop forearm pain were assigned a dummy
date during the follow up year, chosen at random on the basis of the
distribution of dates of onset derived from the participants who
developed forearm pain. The work related exposures were then assessed
by the date of onset of pain (participants with forearm pain) and the
dummy date (others). To determine whether an individual exposure or a
small group of exposures could reliably identify a group at high risk
of developing forearm pain, those factors that on univariate analysis
showed a significant risk were selected as candidate variables for
entry into forward stepwise Cox regression models, in each of the
dimensions considered.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Of the 1953 individuals posted a questionnaire at baseline, 1715 returned a completed questionnaire. Excluding from the denominator those participants who were unlikely to have received the questionnaire (82 no longer at registered address, one dead), the adjusted participation rate was 92%. At two years' follow up, 317 of the original 1715 respondents were not followed up (14 had died, 251 were no longer either registered with the general practitioner or at the registered address, and 52 had reported forearm pain at baseline). The remaining 1398 participants were sent a follow up postal questionnaire. This was completed by 1260 participants (adjusted follow up rate of 90%).
The prevalence of forearm pain at follow up was 8.3% (105 participants), with little difference between men and women (table 1). Overall, prevalence increased with age among the men but not the women. Around one third of participants (34%) reporting forearm pain had consulted their general practitioner about the pain, with a similar proportion (35%) having some related disability. Pain was rarely confined only to the forearm region of the upper limb (9%). Pain was also reported in the wrist (61 participants; 66%), hand (42; 45%), and elbow (45; 48%). Regional pain syndromes at other sites were also common among those reporting forearm pain: 67% reported shoulder pain and 65% low back pain whereas 45% satisfied the American College of Rheumatology's definition of chronic widespread pain.
|
Risk factors
Morbidities
Participants reporting another regional pain syndrome or
chronic widespread pain at baseline were at increased risk of reporting
new onset of forearm pain at follow up (table 2). Increased risks
(twofold or threefold) for developing forearm pain were observed for
those with shoulder pain, low back pain, or chronic widespread
pain. Table 3 shows the associations of other baseline
measurements with forearm pain of new onset. Participants scoring in
the middle or highest groups for the general health questionnaire, who
reported ever having at least one symptom on the somatic symptom scale
or with high scores on the health behaviour subscale of the illness
attitude scales, had a significantly increased risk of forearm pain. In
contrast, health anxiety showed only a weak, and not significant,
relation with onset of
symptoms.
|
|
Work related mechanical factors
Of the 105 participants with forearm pain at follow up, 42 (40%) reported being in employment at the time of onset of pain. Of
the 1155 participants without forearm pain, 740 were in employment on
their assigned dummy date. These 782 participants form the subgroup on
whom an analysis of the role of work related exposures on the onset of
forearm pain was undertaken. Most (84%; 657 participants) reported
only one job during the total follow up period; 14% (109) and 2%
(n=16) had two and three jobs respectively.
|
Work related psychosocial factors
The strongest psychosocial factor associated with the onset
of forearm pain was related to the level of satisfaction with support
from supervisors and colleagues (table 4). Compared with those who were
satisfied most of the time, those who were only occasionally or never
satisfied had a risk of 4.7 (2.2 to 10). Participants who believed that
they could rarely make their own decisions at work had double the risk
of new onset of forearm pain, whereas non-significant increased risks
were also observed in those who thought that their job was too hectic
(relative risk 2.0), too boring or monotonous (2.5), or caused stress
(3.3).
Multivariate model
To ascertain whether, when considered together, a small
group of factors collected at baseline could reliably characterise
those participants who would develop forearm pain, we conducted further
Cox regression analyses by using a forward stepwise model. In the model
for mechanical exposures, the only factor entered was repetitive use of
the arms, whereas in the model for work related psychosocial factors,
only the level of satisfaction with support from supervisor or
colleagues was included. The model considering other morbidities and
illness attitudes included two factors: high scores on the illness
behaviour subscale of the illness attitude scales and high scores on
the general health questionnaire. When these four factors were entered
into a single multivariate model, all factors remained important
independent predictors of the onset of symptoms (table 5). For each
participant we calculated the number of factors (among the four in the
final model) for which they reported exposure in the highest category. The prevalence of forearm pain increased from 0.4% among those exposed
to none of the factors to 15.4% for those reporting all factors.
|
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This is the first population based prospective study, of which we are aware, examining the epidemiology of diffuse forearm pain. Forearm pain is a common symptom, which frequently results in interference with daily activities or consultation to a general practitioner. Forearm pain rarely, however, occurs in isolation. Given its co-occurrence with other syndromes of regional and widespread pain, it is not surprising that the aetiology is similar. Onset was independently related to psychological factors, aspects of illness behaviour, other somatic symptoms, and work related mechanical and psychosocial factors. 9 10 This remained true even when analysis was restricted to those participants with forearm pain or upper limb pain only (data not shown).
The role of mechanical factors in the onset of forearm pain has long been suspected, in particular repetitive movements of the arms and wrists. It is a common symptom in occupations that involve writing or keyboard work, with particularly high exposures.11 One study of 17 patients diagnosed with "repetitive strain injury" found symptoms and objective signs consistent with a minor polyneuropathy, whereas a group of 29 keyboard workers (most without symptoms) showed early signs of the condition.12 Other studies have shown vascular abnormalities in affected upper limbs. 13 14
The onset of forearm pain was not related to mechanical factors alone: high levels of distress and adverse psychosocial factors also predicted the onset of symptoms. The strongest psychosocial predictor was dissatisfaction with support form work supervisors or colleagues, but aspects of demand such as stress, worry, job pace, and level of interest were also associated (although not significantly) with future symptoms. Further, the concept that forearm pain may be one feature of a wider process of somatisation was supported by the observation that participants who developed forearm pain were more likely to report having previously had other somatic symptoms. Similar risk factors have been found for other syndromes of regional pain such as shoulder and back pain, and these are common features of chronic widespread pain and fibromyalgia. 15 16 These observations support the view that in many cases forearm pain may be a regional manifestation of a more widespread pain syndrome.
|
What is already known on this topic
Several countries have experienced "epidemics" of forearm pain in occupational settings Little is known about risk factors for onset of forearm pain What this study addsHigh levels of psychological distress, experiencing other somatic symptoms, and aspects of illness behaviour predict onset of forearm pain In the workplace, repetitive movements of the arms or wrists and adverse psychosocial factors (for example, lack of support from supervisors and colleagues) both predict onset of forearm pain Forearm pain commonly co-occurs with other regional musculoskeletal pain syndromes |
Our study emphasises the multifactorial nature of forearm pain in the
population. It confirms a long suspected relation between work related
repetitive movements and onset of forearm pain but also that the onset
of symptoms can be predicted by high levels of psychological distress
and adverse work related psychosocial experiences. Future studies
examining and refining hypotheses about the aetiology of diffuse
forearm pain should consider each of these domains, and misleading
terms such as "cumulative trauma disorder" or "repetitive strain
injury," implying a single uniform cause, should be avoided.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the doctors and patients of the participating general practices and Dr Sidney Benjamin and Ann Papageorgiou who helped design and coordinate the original survey.
Contributors: GJM and AJS conceived the original idea, designed and supervised conducting the study and the analysis of results. IMH conducted the study and the analysis of results. GJM took the lead in writing the paper, with AJS and IMH revising the manuscript. All authors will act as guarantors for the paper.
| |
Footnotes |
|---|
Funding: The Arthritis Research Campaign and the Health and Safety Executive.
Competing interests: None declared.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Helliwell P. The elbow, forearm, wrist and hand. In Clinical rheumatology: regional musculoskeletal pain. Eds P Croft and PM Brooks. In: London: Baillière Tindall, 1999:311-328. |
| 2. |
Harrington JM, Carter JT, Birrell L, Gompertz D.
Surveillance case definitions for work-related upper limb syndromes.
Occup Environ Med
1998;
55:
264-271 |
| 3. |
Hunt IM, Silman AJ, Benjamin S, McBeth J, Macfarlane GJ.
The prevalence and associated features of chronic widespread pain in the community using the "Manchester" definition of chronic widespread pain.
Rheumatology
1999;
38:
275-279 |
| 4. | Ritchie J, Jacoby A, Bone M. Access to primary health care. London: Office for Population Censuses and Surveys social survey division: HMSO, 1981. |
| 5. | Goldberg D, Williams P. A user's guide to the general health questionnaire. Windsor: NEFR-Nelson, 1988. |
| 6. |
Othmer E, DeSouza C.
A screening test for somatisation disorder (hysteria).
Am J Psychiatry
1985;
142:
1146-1149 |
| 7. | Speckens AE, Spinhoven P, Sloeckers PPA, Bolk JH, van Hemert AM. A validation study of the Whitely index, the illness attitude scales, and the somatosensory amplification scale in general medical and general practice patients. J Psychosom Res 1996; 40: 95-104[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 8. | Wolfe F, Smythe HA, Yunus MB, Bennett RM, Bombardier C, Goldenberg DL, et al. The American College of Rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia: report of the multicenter criteria committee. Arthritis Rheum 1990; 33: 160-172[Medline]. |
| 9. |
Pope DP, Croft PR, Pritchard CM, Silman AJ, Macfarlane GJ.
Occupational factors related to shoulder pain and disability.
Occup Environ Med
1997;
54:
316-321 |
| 10. |
Papageorgiou AC, Macfarlane GJ, Thomas E, Croft PR, Jayson MIV, Silman AJ.
Psychosocial factors in the workplace do they predict new episodes of low back pain?
Spine
1997;
22:
1137-1142[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11. | Punnet L, Robins JM, Wegman DH, Keyserling WM. Soft tissue disorders in the upper limbs of female garment workers. Scand J Work Environ Health 1985; 11: 417-425[Medline]. |
| 12. | Greening J, Lynn B. Vibration sense in the upper limb in patients with repetitive strain injury and a group of at-risk office workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 1998; 71: 29-34[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 13. |
Sharma SD, Smith EM, Hazelman BL, Jenner JR.
Thermographic changes in keyboard operators with chronic forearm pain.
BMJ
1997;
314:
118 |
| 14. |
Pritchard MH, Pugh N, Wright I, Brownlee M.
A vascular basis for repetitive injury.
Rheumatology
1999;
38:
636-639 |
| 15. | Bongers PM, de Winter CR, Kompier MAJ, Hildebrandt VH. Psychosocial factors at work and musculoskeletal disease. Scand J Work Environ Health 1993; 19: 297-312[Medline]. |
| 16. | Macfarlane GJ. Generalised pain, fibromyalgia and regional pain: an epidemiological view. Baillières Clin Rheumatol 1999; 13: 403-414. |
(Accepted 16 June 2000)
Read all Rapid Responses