• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.37-42
• /
• 2010

Over years it has been increasingly concerned with how upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders (UEMSDs) are attributed to psychosocial job stressors. A review study was conducted to examine associations between UEMSDs and psychosocial work factors, and to recommend what to consider for the associations. For studies in which the job demand-control-support (DCS) model or its variables were specifically employed, published papers were selected and reviewed. A number of studies have reported relationships between UEMSDs symptoms and psychosocial exposure variables. For example, the findings are: higher numbness in the upper extremity was significantly attributed to by less decision latitude at work; work demands were significantly associated with neck and shoulder symptoms while control over time was associated with neck symptoms; and the combination of high psychosocial demands and low decision latitude was a significant predictor for shoulder and neck pain in a female working population. Sources of bias, such as interaction or study design, were discussed. UEMSDs were shown to be associated with psychosocial work factors in various studies where the job DCS model was addressed. Nonetheless, this review suggests that further studies should be conducted to much more clarify the association between UEMSDs and psychosocial factors.

• Safety and Health at Work
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.469-474
• /
• 2022

Background: Nowadays, counter-productive work behaviors (CWBs) have turned into a common and costly position for many organizations and especially health centers. Therefore, the study was carried out to examine and compare the demand-control-support (DCS) and effort-reward imbalance (ERI) models as predictors of CWBs. Methods: The study was cross-sectional. The population was all nurses working in public hospitals in Hamadan, Iran of whom 320 were selected as the sample based on simple random sampling method. The instruments used were Job Content Questionnaire, Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire, and Counterproductivity Work Behavior Questionnaire. Data were analyzed using correlation and regression analysis in SPSS18. Results: The findings indicated that both ERI and DCS models could predict CWB (p ≤ 0.05); however, the DCS model variables can explain the variance of CWB-I and CWB-O approximately 8% more than the ERI model variables and have more power in predicting these behaviors in the nursing community. Conclusion: According to the results, job stress is a key factor in the incidence of CWBs among nurses. Considering the importance and impact of each component of ERI and DCS models in the occurrence of CWBs, corrective actions can be taken to reduce their incidence in nurses.