Prevalence of Low Back Pain And Its Associated Risk Factor Among Office Workers at Pejabat Harta Bina UTM

PREVALENCE OF LOW BACK PAIN AND ITS ASSOCIATED
RISK FACTOR AMONG OFFICE WORKERS AT PEJABAT
HARTA BINA UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA (UTM)
KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA
MUHAMAD ARIF BIN SALLEHUDDIN
BACHELOR IN OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (HONS)
CYBERJAYA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
SEPTEMBER 2019

PREVALENCE OF LOW BACK PAIN AND ITS ASSOCIATED RISK FACTOR
AMONG OFFICE WORKERS AT PEJABAT HARTA BINA UNIVERSITI
TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA (UTM) KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA
By
MATRIC NO: BOSH 1701-7748
Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Safety and Health, Cyberjaya University College of
Medical Sciences, in partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Bachelor in Occupational
Safety and Health (Hons)

i
PERMISSION TO USE
All Material contained within the thesis, including limitation text, logo, icon,
photographs and all other artwork, is copyrighted of Cyberjaya University College of Medical
Sciences, Malaysia unless otherwise stated. Use may of any material contained within the
thesis for non-commercial purpose from the copyright holder. Commercial use of material only
be made with the express prior written permission of Cyberjaya University College of Medical
Sciences, Malaysia
Copyright © Cyberjaya University College of Medical Sciences, Malaysia

ii
ABSTRAK
Sakit belakang boleh ditakrifkan sebagai rasa sakit, ketegangan atau kekakuan yang terletak di
bawah margin kosal di atas lipatan gluteal inferior (gluteal sulcus), dengan atau tanpa sciatica.
Nyeri punggung yang rendah (LBP) adalah punca utama ketidakupayaan dan mengganggu
kepuasan peribadi dan pelaksanaan kerja. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk menentukan adalah untuk
menentukan kelaziman Low Back Pain dan faktor risiko yang berkaitan dengan pekerja pejabat
di Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Peserta
yang diambil dalam kajian ini adalah berdasarkan kriteria kemasukan berikut termasuk pekerja
lelaki dan wanita, pekerja di dalam jabatan, tiada gangguan neurologi, pekerja yang boleh
berkomunikasi dalam Bahasa Malaysia atau Bahasa Inggeris, semua kaum, dan pekerja tunggal
dan berkahwin . Sampel pengecualian adalah pekerja yang bekerja sementara / latihan /
kontrak, pekerja cacat (OKU) dan pekerja hamil. Kajian rentas keratan ini menggunakan
pensampelan kemudahan untuk mendapatkan 20 keputusan. 19 orang responden memberikan
selidik soal selidik yang lengkap (1 soal selidik yang tidak lengkap, dengan itu dianggap
sebagai data tidak sah) menunjukkan bahawa 36.8% pekerja mengalami ketidakselesaan sakit
belakang Kembali semasa bekerja 1-2 kali minggu lalu. Semua maklumat dikumpulkan melalui
borang soal selidik yang telah disahkan. Data dianalisis dengan menggunakan versi SPSS 23.0.
Kekerapan Back Back Pain biasanya berlaku 1-2 kali minggu lalu (36.8), lelaki (57.9%), Umur
25 - 31 tahun (31.6%), kedudukan di Pejabat Kerani (26.3%), kadang-kadang Tidak mencukupi
untuk menyelesaikan semua tugas kerja anda yang lengkap dalam tugas kerja (47.4%), selalu
memerlukan banyak perkara (47.4%) dan kadang-kadang mereka yang lebih dekat bersedia
mendengar masalah yang berkaitan dengan pekerjaan (42.1%). Kesimpulannya kemudahan
dan penyediaan yang betul sahaja tidak mencukupi dan teknik yang tepat, semangat berpasukan
dan kerjasama sangat diperlukan

iii
ABSTRACT
Low back can be defined as pain, tension or stiffness located below the costal margin above
the inferior gluteal folds (gluteal sulcus), with or without sciatica. Low back pain (LBP) is the
main source of incapacity and disrupts personal satisfaction and work execution. This research
aimed to determine is to determine the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its associated risk
factor among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The participants who were recruited into the study were based on
these following inclusion criteria including This includes male and female workers, workers
within the department, no neurological disorder, workers that can communicate in Bahasa
Malaysia or English, all races, and single and married workers. The exclusion samples were
workers who work temporary/ internships/ contracts, disabled workers (OKU) and pregnant
workers. This cross-sectional study employed convenience sampling to obtain 20 results. 19
respondents gave a completed questionnaire sheet (1 questionnaire are incomplete, thus
deemed invalid data) draws that 36.8% of workers experienced Low Back pain discomfort
during work 1-2 times last week. All the information was collected through a questionnaire
form that has been validate. Data was analyzed by using SPSS version 23.0. Prevalence of Low
Back Pain are usually occurred 1-2 times last week (36.8), male (57.9%), Aged 25 - 31 years
old (31.6%), position in Office Clerk (26.3%), sometimes Insufficient time to complete all your
work tasks complete in work task (47.4%), always require to remember a lot of things ( 47.4%)
and sometimes their Immediate superior willing listen work related problems (42.1%). In
conclusion proper facilities and provision alone are not enough and a proper technique,
teamwork spirits and cooperation are most needed

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Praise be to ALLAH (S.W.T) the Almighty which with His Willingness has blessed me with
good health and also has guided me to overcome various obstacles patiently and successfully
in order to accomplish this research study.
My heartiest appreciation to Professor Dr. Mohamad Khan Jamal Khan who has generously
provided the knowledge and guidance from the initial steps of the research until the
accomplishment of the proposal stage.
My special appreciation to Mr. Hari Krishnan S/O Tamil Selvan, my supervisor who has
responsibly supervised in the next stage of preparing this research study until the fully
accomplishment and submission of this thesis.
My love to my parents, En. Sallehuddin Bin Muhamad and Pn. Hamsiah Binti Mustapha; and
to my brother and sister, Muhamad Afiq and Alya Mastura for all the unexhausted moral
supports and reminder to take care of myself.
Last but not least, my sincere thank you to all of my colleagues of BOSH September 2017/2019
Class who has assisted and shared their knowledge and also to the cooperative office employees
who had spent their time to give their sincere feedback which had contributed to the
completeness and accomplishment of this study.

v
DECLARATION
I hereby declare the thesis entitled “PREVALANCE OF LOW BACK PAIN AND ITS
ASSOCIATED RISK FACTOR AMONG OFFICE WORKERS AT PEJABAT HARTA
BINA UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA (UTM) KAUALA LUMPUR,
MALAYSIA” submitted by me is my original work except for quotations and citations which
have been appropriately acknowledged. I also declare that it has not been previously, and not
concurrently submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma at Cyberjaya University
College of Medical Science or any other intuition.
___________________________________
Date: 2019

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PERMISSION OF USE i
ABSTRAK ii
ABTRACT iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT iv
DECLARATION v
LIST OF TABLES ix
LIST OF FIGURES ix
LIST OF ABBREVIATION x
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of Study 1
1.2 Problem Statement 4
1.3 Research Questions 5
1.4 Objective of the Research 6
1.4.1General Objective 6
1.4.2 Specific Objective 6
1.5 Research Hypothesis 7
1.6 Significance of The Study 8
1.7 Scope of the Study 8
1.8 Operational Definition 8
1.9 Conceptual Framework 9
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction 10
2.2 Ergonomic Factor and Working Condition Associate with 11
Low Back Pain
2.3 Psychosocial factor 12
2.3.1 Psychosocial Factor Associated to Low Back Pain 13
2.4 Sociodemographic Factor That Associated With Low Back Pain 14

vii
3 METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Location 16
3.2 Research Design 17
3.3 Research Sample 17
3.3 Population, Samples and Sample Size 18
3.4 Research Duration 19
3.5 Research Instrumentation 19
3.6 Data Collection Procedure 19
3.7 Ethical Issues and Consent 21
3.8 Data Analysis 22
4 RESULT AND DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Response Rate 23
4.2 Descriptive Statistic
4.2.1 Description through Nordic Questionnaire for Low Back 24
4.2.2 Descriptive between Low Back Pain and Sociodemographic 25
4.2.2.1 Descriptive for Gender Group 25
4.2.2.2 Descriptive for Age Group 26
4.2.2.3 Descriptive for Job Roles 27
4.2.3 Descriptive for Psychosocial Factor 28
4.2.3.1 Descriptive for Quantitative Demand 28
4.2.3.2 Descriptive for Cognitive Demand 30
4.2.3.3 Descriptive for Social Support 32
4.3 Bivariate Analysis 34
4.3.1 ANOVA for Low Back Pain Assessment through NORDIC 34
4.3.2 T-test for Gender 35
4.3.3 ANOVA for Age 36
4.3.4 ANOVA for Job Roles 37
4.3.5 Pearson Correlation for Quantitative Demand 38
4.3.6 Pearson Correlation for Cognitive Demand 39
4.3.7 Pearson Correlation for Social Support 41

viii
5 DISCUSSION, LIMITATION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Discussion 43
5.1.1 Low Back Pain Assessment through NORDIC 43
5.1.2 Gender Group 43
5.1.3 Age Group 44
5.1.4 Job Roles 44
5.1.5 Psychosocial Factor in Quantitative Demand 45
5.1.6 Psychosocial Factor in Cognitive Demand 45
5.1.7 Psychosocial Factor in Social Support 45
5.2 Limitation 46
5.3 Recommendation 47
5.3.1 Administrative Control to Prevent Low Back Pain 47
5.3.1.1 Ergonomic Risk Assessment 47
5.3.1.2 Education 47
5.3.1.3 Anthropometrics 47
5.3.2 Ergonomic Assisting Device 48
5.3.2.1 Footrest 48
5.3.2.2 Adjustable Monitor Arm 48
5.3.2.3 Keyboard and Mouse Tray 49
5.3.2.4 Laptop Stand 49
5.3.3 Adjustable Office Chair With Lumbar Support 49
5.3.3.1 Seat Height Adjustment 49
5.3.3.2 Seat Angle Adjustment 50
5.3.3.3 Seat Depth Adjustment 50
5.3.3.4 Back Height Adjustment 50
5.3.3.5 Back Angle Adjustment 50
5.3.4 Psychosocial risk Factor to Prevent Low Back Pain 51
5.3.4.1 5s Methodology 51
5.3.4.2 Microbreak 51
5.3.4.3 Counselling and Reporting 51
5.3.4.4 Better Working Environment 51
5.3.4.5 Reward and Recognition 52
BIBLIOGRAPHY 53
APPENDICES 59

ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Frequency Table of Low Back Pain Assessment Through NORDIC Questionnaire for
Low Back 24
Table 2. Frequency Table for Gender Group 25
Table 3. Frequency Table for Age Group 26
Table 4. Frequency Table for Job Roles 27
Table 5. Frequency Table of Quantitative Demand 28
Table 6. Frequency Table of Cognitive Demand 30
Table 7. Frequency Table of Social Support 32
Table 8. Analysis of Variance – Nordic 34
Table 9. T-test for Gender 35
Table 10. Analysis of Variance – Age Group 36
Table 11. Analysis of Variance – Job Roles 37
Table 12. Pearson Product Moment Correlation for Quantitative Demand 38
Table 13. Pearson Product Moment Correlation for Cognitive Demand 39
Table 14. Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Social Support 41

x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework of Independent and Dependent Variable 9
Figure 2. Research Location 16
Figure 3. Flowchart of Data Collection Procedure 20
Figure 4. Gender Group 25
Figure 5. Age Group 26
Figure 6. Job Roles 27
Figure 7. Anthropometry for Siting and Standing 47
Figure 8. Adjustable Monitor Arm 48
Figure 9. Keyboard and Mouse Tray 49
Figure 10. Adjustable Chair with Lumbar Support 50

xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
LBP Low Back Pain
OKU Orang Kurang Upaya
UTM Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
COPSOQ Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire

1
CHAPTER 1
BACKGROUND
1.1 Background of Study
Office employees define an individual who works in a workplace that carries out clerical or
administrative for a corporation. it is a place to perform all the administrative works done
professionally. it is also described as an area where individuals carry out their daily affairs of
a business in an organization ("Office worker definition and meaning | Collins English
Dictionary", n.d.)
The main task of office workers is keeping documents in a sensible order, managing funds,
coordinating activities and safeguarding assets. office Administration is also an area for
storage, process and retrieve data (“Evolution of The Roles of office workers information
Technology Essay,” 2016).
Low back may be outlined as pain, tension or stiffness settled below the costal margin on top
of the inferior gluteal folds (gluteal sulcus), with or without sciatica. The overwhelming
majority of low back pain because of mechanical. In several cases, low back pain is related to
spondylosis, a term that refers to the overall degeneration of the spine related to traditional
wear and tear that happens within the joints, discs, and bones of the spine as people get older
("Low Back Pain Fact Sheet | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke", n.d.).
Dr. Ron Nusbaum (2011) declared that low back pain may be classified into 2 categories Acute
(Short-term) Low back pain and Chronic (Long-term) Low back pain. Acute low back pain is
a severe, sharp pain or a dull ache that can be experienced up to six weeks or fewer. The pain
is typically from an injury or trauma but most of the majority of cases reported have no solid
known causes. Acute low back pain can result in a spine disorder such as ankylosing spondylitis
or herniated disc. Symptoms may include, a limited spinal flexibility, limited range of motion,
and the inability to stand straight.

2
Chronic Low back pain can be defined as when the pain has persisted for more than 12 weeks.
Chronic low back pain may feel like a deep, achy, dull or burning type pain that usually lasts
longer than three months. The pain is typically from the lower back area and/or through down
through the legs. A patient who is diagnosed with chronic low back pain finds it is worsening
when sitting in a static position in a long time like, typing, spending a long time bending over,
lifting, bending or pulling, or even. not exercising regularly.
Low back pain has become one of the biggest problems for the public health system worldwide.
A study conducted by Maher, Underwood & Buchbinder (2017) stated that 84% percent of
people have diagnose associated with low back pain once during their lifetime. Ehrlich (2003)
also stated “It is also a number one leading causes of disability worldwide”.
According to the (Vos et al., 2012), Low Back Pain ranked as the top condition living with
disability accounting for 10.7% of total years lived with disability for years. Work disability
due to low pain (LBP) had causes more disability than any other condition with an increase in
patients seeking care, healthcare expenditures related to LBP have outpaced other medical
conditions. (Martin et al., 2009)
Low back pain (LBP) has been reported to be a major problem for office workers, affecting
34% to 51% of workers annually. (Anyaniyi, Ukpai & Adeniyi, 2010; Janwantanakul, Pensri,
Jiamjarasrangsri & Sinsongsook, 2008).
Between 14% to 23% of office workers reported a new onset of LBP during their 1-year follow-
up. (Juul-Kristensen, Søgaard, Strøyer & Jensen, 2004; Sitthipornvorakul, Janwantanakul &
Lohsoonthorn, 2015). The annual prevalence of chronic LBP has been reported to range from
15% up to 45%, with a point prevalence of 30%. (Manchikanti, Singh, Datta, Cohen & Hirsch,
2009)
Both environmental characteristics and individual factors have been identified as the risk
factors of low back pain. The incidence of low back pain rises sharply in early adulthood.
("Musculoskeletal Disorders and the Workplace", 2001).The first major interaction between
environmental characteristics and individual factors occurs when workers start in their first job.
(Leboeuf-Yde, Kyvik, 1998).

3
Office work could be a sitting add nature, that ordinarily involves prolonged sitting, computer
use, participation in conferences, giving presentations, reading documents and materials, and
frequent use of the telephone and different electronic devices. (IJmker, Blatter, van der Beek,
van Mechelen & Bongers, 2006)
In occupational studies, special attention is given to prolonged and continual trunk flexion.
there's a growing body of studies that specialize in sitting exposures since sitting could be a
quite common operating position in trendy jobs. Even once sitting upright, the body part spine
is in a semi- flexed position (Endo et al., 2012). Prolonged sitting is one in all a standard
intensifying issue for Low Back Pain sufferers (Astfalck, O'Sullivan, Straker & Smith, 2010).

4
1.2 Problem Statement
The issue of Low Back pain among Office Worker is an important issue that must be fully
addressed. However, Low Back Pain is unrecognized usually due to social reasons. A good
example is where manual labor is the norm, the absence of one laborer because of back pain is
barely noticeable if there is another worker who is available to do the work especially in
industrialized settings. However, where time and money have been spent on training on
employees, absence is more likely to be noticed and substitution often is not possible (Ehlich
& Khaltaev, 1999).
Compensation from sick funds, social security and compensation systems often results in Low
Back Pain. In Belgium, certain treatments like osteopathic care is not included in the
“mandatory health insurance, reimbursement is organized through additional private health
insurance. This makes the patients of osteopathic practices in Belgium predominantly privately
paying (Franke, Franke, Belz & Fryer, 2017; Franke, Franke & Fryer, 2014; Licciardone,
Brimhall & King, 2005).
As the result, Low Back Pain has caused considerable personal suffering due to the pain
disability, impaired quality of work and life in general, which can result in a significant
socioeconomic burden on both patients and society (Katz, 2006). Furthermore, a person who
is suffering Low Back pain can limit the individual activities work following with work
absenteeism, imposing a significant financial burden on healthcare systems and the economies.
(Duthey, 2013).
The intended of this research will to identify the prevalence, the risk factor, sociodemographic
characteristic (age, gender, race, marital status, highest education level), working condition
[duration of desk work (hr.), No. of hours per week, daily sitting time(hr.) and Daily computer
using time (hr.)] and the psychosocial factor (Quantitative Demand, Cognitive Demand and
Social Support Demand) and Ergonomic Factor (Body Posture, Repetitive movement, Pushing
or pulling, Body bending and rotation, exertion force, Temperature and wrist bending and
rotation) associated with low back pain among office workers.

5
1.3 Research Question
1. What is the prevalence of low back pain among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia?
2. Is there any association between Low Back Pain and the sociodemographic factor
(Gender, Age and Job Roles) among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia?
3. Is there any association between Low Back Pain and the psychosocial factor
(quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand, Social Support Demand) among office
workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia?

6
1.4 Objective of the Research
1.4.1 General Objective
The general objective of the research is to determine the prevalence of low back pain and its
associated risk factor among office worker at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
1.4.2 Specific Objective
i. To determine the prevalence of Low Back Pain and Low Back Pain Assessment through
NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
ii. To determine the association between Low Back Pain and the sociodemographic factor
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
iii. To determine the association between Low Back Pain and the psychosocial factor
(quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand, Social Support Demand) among office
Malaysia.

7
1.5 Hypothesis
• Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Low Back Pain
Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at
Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
• Research Hypothesis (H1): There is prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Low Back Pain
Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at
• Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no association between the prevalence of Low Back Pain
and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Gender, Age and Job roles among office
Malaysia.
• Research Hypothesis (H1): There is association between the prevalence of low back pain
and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Gender, Age and Job roles among office
Malaysia.
• Null Hypothesis (H0): There is no prevalence of Low Back Pain and the psychosocial factor
(quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand, Social Support Demand) among office workers
at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
• Research Hypothesis (H1): There is prevalence of low back pain and the psychosocial factor
(quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand, Social Support Demand) among office workers

8
1.6 Significant of the research
The significant of the research is fewer researchers are doing their research about the of the
low back pain and its associated factor among office workers. Therefore, the researcher wants
to research the low back pain and its associated factor among office workers. The researcher
would like to address the prevalence of low back pain and its associated factors for office
workers.
1.7 Scope of the Research
The scope of the research is to study the above objectives among office workers in Pejabat
Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The research
covers the sociodemographic factor, Low Back Pain assessment through NORDIC
Questionnaire for Low Back and Psychosocial Factors (quantitative demand, Cognitive
Demand, Social Support Demand).
1.8 Operational Definitions
i. Low Back Pain – a pain, tension or stiffness located below the costal margin above the
inferior gluteal folds (gluteal sulcus), with or without sciatica.
ii. Acute Low Back Pain – Acute Low Back Pain is severe, sharp pain or dull ache that
can be experienced up to six weeks or fewer.
iii. Chronic Low Back Pain – Chronic Low Back Pain is usually defined as a symptom
when the pain has persisted for more than 12 weeks.
iv. Gluteal folds – A prominent fold that marks the upper limit of the thigh from the lower
limit of the buttock; it coincides with the lower border of the gluteus maximus muscle;
the furrow between the buttock and thigh.
v. Sciatica – Back pain caused by a problem with the sciatic nerve. This is a large nerve that
runs from the lower back down the back of each leg.
vi. Facet Joint – An arrangement of synovial, plane joints between the articular procedures
of two nearby vertebrae. There are two aspect joints in every spinal movement portion
and every feature joint is innervated by the intermittent meningeal nerves.

9
1.9 Conceptual Framework
Social Demographic
• Age
• Gender
• Job Roles
Psychosocial Factor
• Quantitative Demand
• Cognitive Demand
• Social Support Demand
Nordic Questionnaire
• During the last work week,
how often did you experience
ache, pain, discomfort?
LOW BACK PAIN
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework of Independent and Dependent Variables

10
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
The office worker defines as a worker who carried out in an office for clerical or administrative
work for an organization. The role of an office worker to type or file documents,
correspondence, reports, statements, and other materials. Most of their workstations usually
have a computer /laptop/keyboard and telephone ("Office worker definition and meaning |
Collins English Dictionary", n.d.)
The main duties of an office worker are Answer telephone or personal inquiries, Photocopy
and collate documents, Maintain and update filing, inventory, mailing and database systems,
Open, sort and route incoming mail and courier package and process reports, applications,
receipts, expenditures, and other documents, using a computer. Most office workers spend at
least 4–6 h per day seated at a desk (Ryde et al., 2014).
Low back defined as pain, tension or stiffness located below the costal margin above the
inferior gluteal folds (gluteal sulcus), with or without sciatica. ("Low Back Pain Fact Sheet |
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke", n.d.). Dr. Ron Nusbaum (2011) stated
that Low Back pain can categorize into two categories that is Acute (Short-term) Low back
pain and Chronic (Long-term).
The expanding awareness in low back pain can be credited to various campaigns such
as September is Pain Awareness Month, a public awareness campaign launched in 2001 that is
conducted by the American Chronic Pain Association. The main goals of Pain Awareness
Month are to educate the community on the severity of this health issue, spread awareness
about treatment and encourage community members to get involved with pain awareness
programs (Conyers, 2017)
Exercise therapy is widely used as an alternative and additional method for the treatment of
chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) (Sargiotto et al.,2016). It helps to reduce pain

11
intensity, increase the range of motion, lessen the risk of recurrent symptoms and help people
return to normal activities and work (van middlekoop et al. 2010).
2.2 Ergonomic Factor and Working Condition Associated with Low Back Pain
In laboratory studies revised by Gallagher (2014), 40%–71% of asymptomatic individuals
without a history of low back pain (LBP) developed LBP within 120 min of standing that did
not resolve with resumed sitting (Nelson-Wong et al., 2008; Marshall et al., 2011; Gallagher
et al., 2014).
A study conduct by Spyropoulos (2008) 648 responded over 771 public office workers in
Greece, among all responders, 33% suffered from LBP at the time of the survey, 37.8% and
41.8% presented with LBP within the previous one and 2 years respectively, and 61.6% of all
office clerks experienced at least one LBP episode in their lifetime. Sleep disturbances due to
low back pain were reported in 37% of the office clerks with chronic low back pain. Multiple
logistic regression models have revealed that significant determinants for predicting low back
pain occurrence are age, gender, body mass index, body distance from computer screen,
adjustable back support, clerk body position while sitting, sitting time of greater than 6 hours,
job satisfaction, repetitive work, and anger.
250 office workers aged between 20 and 64 years from different Lebanese companies and
banks. the researcher results show that 112 (44.8%) of the recruited population suffer from
back pain. Females are the most affected (68%) versus males (32%). The logistic regression
showed that LBP was positively associated with backbone crookedness, knee pain, wrist pain,
contractions, numbness, previous treatment for back pain, doctor consultation, household work
for 3-6 hours, maintaining same posture for > 5 hours, fear of changing job and higher BMI.
(Bawab et al., 2015).
Two hundred and nineteen participants reported LBP during the previous four weeks. A
varying number of office workers reported frequent computer use (92%), sitting for >2 hours
a day (88%), forward bending (58%), lifting moderate to heavy objects (52%), body twisting
(46%), reaching (38%) and standing for more than 2 hours a day (22%) during the work day.
A majority of participants reported satisfaction with the positions of the computer screen (68%)
and keyboard/mouse (55%). Forty-five per cent of participants used a chair with lumbar
support. (Janwantanakul et al., 2011).

12
2.3 Psychosocial factor
Psychosocial is defined as a mix of mental and social regard to working condition,
psychological factors at work effect upon the mental reaction of employees to their work and
workplace conditions and social factor allude to social association at work (European agency
for safety and Health at Work). Psychosocial risk factors are things that may affect workers'
psychological response to their work and workplace conditions (including working
relationships with supervisors and colleagues). Examples are high workloads, tight deadlines
and lack of control of the work and working methods. Work-related stress has the potential to
negatively affect an individual's psychological and physical health, as well as an organization’s
effectiveness. Therefore, it is recognized world-wide as a major challenge to workers' health
and the health of their organizations. ("MAC Tool - Psychosocial risks factors", n.d.).
The psychosocial risk factor can be divided into thirteen psychosocial risk factors that have
recognized at Simon Fraser University based on ‘extensive research and review of empirical
data from national and international best practices. The 13 organizational factors that impact
organizational health, the health of individual employees and the financial bottom line,
including the way work is carried out and the context in which work occurs, are Psychological
Support, Organizational Culture, Clear Leadership & Expectations, Civility & Respect,
Psychological Competencies & Requirements, Growth & Development, Recognition &
Reward, Involvement & Influence, Workload Management, Engagement, Balance,
Psychological Protection, Protection of Physical Safety. ("Mental Health - Psychosocial Risk
Factors in the Workplace", 2018).
Univariate analysis showed significant differences between two groups between office and
operational worker of a regional electricity distribution company in Iran, 4 out 5 domains,
including job demand, job content, work individual interface and health in the office domain.
The operational group scored higher and report more stress in job demand and work individual
interface domains. The office workers had higher score and worse state in job content and
health domains (Aminian, Moradi & Eftekhari, 2018).

13
2.3.1 Psychosocial factor associated to low back pain
The ‘psychosocial work environment’ is a collective way of referring to work-related
psychological and social influences on health such as time pressure, monotonous work, social
reciprocity, job control and autonomy, fairness, work demands and job security, as well as
social contact with co-workers and supervisors (Cox & Griffiths, 2005).
Jobs involving repetitive and monotonous tasks can be demotivating and can contribute to
psychosocial problems. On the other hand, very complex tasks might contribute to stressful
situations for the worker involved unless they have the skills and job design necessary to cope
with them. Additionally, emotionally demanding interactions (such as dealing with angry
clients and hiding feelings) might be required for jobs that involve contact with people. Finally,
the lack of adequate skills to perform the job might harm the well-being of workers through
increasing levels of stress. In general, more workers report a lack of variety in their work or
complexity in tasks than they do emotional demands or lacking the necessary skills.
One of the job content variables that seem to have a significant impact on the health and well-
being of workers is the monotony of tasks that jobs involve. This indicator has seen a small
rise in recent years. In 2010, 46% of workers in the EU reported that generally, their work
involved monotonous tasks, compared with 43% previous research done in 2005.
Job content and the tasks involved are closely linked to the occupation of the as the workers at
higher levels of the occupational structure carry out more complex tasks, while those at lower
levels have more monotonous and repetitive tasks. The role a worker has in an organization is
associated with the overall organization of work and management. Sometimes there is a lack
of role clarity, which has implications for the health and safety of workers. Sometimes the job
content (for example, its complexity), as well as social isolation and absence of support through
lack of communication and information, can make a worker’s role less clear. The consequence
is that the worker may not know what is expected in the job, as is the case among 6% of workers
in the EU. In almost all sectors of the economy, there is a small group of workers who ‘at least
sometimes’ do not know what is expected of them at work. This is most common in financial
services (8%), agriculture (7%) and construction (7%) and is less common in the health sector
(4%). ("Psychosocial risks in Europe: Prevalence and strategies for prevention - Safety and
health at work - EU-OSHA", 2014)

14
Emotional demands are a characteristic of some jobs, especially in education, health, and other
services. This ‘emotional labor is work in which the job content is expected to affect workers
emotionally. Typically, in their contact with clients, patients, customers and so on, some
workers need to hide their feelings (such as hiding fear or remaining friendly) or manage their
feelings (such as limiting compassion or empathy). Excessive emotional demands are shown
to have a negative impact (Maslach et al, 1996).
The administrative group had higher scores in the "degree of freedom at work" scale and had
a better state. In the "interpersonal relationship" domain, no statistically significant difference
was observed between the operational and office workers. In the health and wellbeing domain,
the administrative scored higher (worst) in terms of general health and slightly higher in terms
of behavioral-cognitive stress. Yet, still, in this domain, both groups were generally in the green
area (scores more than 60 for the scales related to health and less than 40 for the scales related
to stress) (Aminian, Moradi
2.4 Sociodemographic factor that associated with low back pain
An increased prevalence of low back pain is associated with patients who have low educational
status (Hoy et al., 2010). Lower educational levels are a strong predictor of more prolonged
episode duration and poorer outcomes (Dionne, 2001).
Psychosocial factors such as stress, anxiety, depression, and certain types of pain behavior are
associated with greater rates of low back pain. The presence of these conditions also increases
the risk that a patient’s episode of back pain will last long enough to be considered chronic
(Hoy et al., 2010; (Linton, 2000).
Likewise, patients who are dissatisfied with their work situation are at risk of having an acute
low back pain transition to a chronic situation by episode (van Tulder, Koes & Bombardier,
2002). Occupational factors, specifically the physical demands of work, are also associated
with an increased prevalence of low back pain.

15
Matsui and colleagues (1997) founded the point prevalence of low back pain to be 39% in
manual workers, whereas it was found in only 18.3% of those work in a siting and desk-bound
position. A more systematic review found that manual handling, bending, twisting, and whole-
body vibration to be risk factors for low back pain (Hoogendoorn et al., 2000). A person with
Obesity, or a body mass index of more than 30 kg/m2, has been connected with an increased
incidence of low back pain. (Hoy et al., 2010; Webb et al., 2003)
& Eftekhari, 2018

16
Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Location
The study population is selected from UTM, Jalan Dato Onn, Kuala Lumpur, 50480 Kuala
Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur.
Figure 2 Research Location

17
3.2 Research design
Cross sectional study design was chosen for this research for data collection to determine the
prevalence of low back pain and its association with job risk factor among Pejabat Harta Bina
UTM Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia office worker.
3.3 Research sample
The respondents must meet all the inclusion and exclusion criteria to be eligible for them to
join the study. Some 20 candidates will respondents via convenience sampling. The
participants who were recruited into the study were chosen based on the following inclusion
criteria. This includes male and female workers, workers within the department, no
neurological disorder, workers that can communicate in Bahasa Malaysia or English, all races,
and single and married workers. For the exclusion criteria, sample include workers who work
temporary/ internships/ contract, disabled workers (OKU) and pregnant workers.

18
3.3 Population, Samples and Sample Size
The research population that will be used is the employees of the Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur department. The population of workers in the
building is roughly composed of over 20 workers, all including the Administrative/Manager,
office clerks, General Assistance Technician/Specialist, Engineer/Executive and Others. For
this research, the Krejcie & Morgan sample size table (1970) will be used to determine the
sample size for this research.

19
3.4 Research duration
The study will begin from October 2018 until August 2019 with a duration of 10 months. The
Data collection will be conducted on 30th
May 2019.
3.5 Research Instrumentation
The instrumentation that use thought this research is based on structed questionnaire from
modified Nordic Musculoskeletal disorder with a reliability score of 0.88–0.98 (Dawson et.al,
2009), and Copenhagen Psychosocial questionnaire (COPSOQ) with a reliability score of
0.75-0.85 (Thorsen SV, Bjorner 2010).
3.6 Data Collection Procedure
The institution was approached by the deputy director of the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur (UTM) and permission was granted to conduct the research among the workers.
The institution approach will be selected within the office workers at Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia Kuala Lumpur (UTM), Malaysia. The research was briefly described about the
research to the administrative workers whoever presents at the time the researcher approaches
the institution.
Questionnaire will personally be distributed by researcher to the workers in one department.
Written consent was obtained from the respondents and instructions were given by the
researcher. If the workers agreed to participate in the study, the may answers the questionnaire
voluntarily. The questionnaire took approximately 4 - 5 minutes to be completed and the
researcher will support the participants for further assistance and the collection of the
questionnaire. A data analysis shall be run once the questionnaire has been collected back. The
figure 3 below represents the flowchart of the data collection procedure.

20
Figure 3 Flowchart of Data Collection Procedure

21
3.7 Ethical Issues and consent
Researching study requires honesty and integrity. Ethical concern of research includes
confidentiality, informed consent, and self-determination. Permission was obtained from the
deputy director of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur (UTM) to allow the researcher
to conduct the study. For the workers, written consent letter was attached with the questionnaire
to brief and gain their concern to participate in the study
Participant’s consent is vital and was obtained before they participate and answer the
questionnaire. The subject was informed of their rights to voluntarily consent or decline to
participate and to withdraw participation at any time without penalty.
Sample workers were informed about the purpose of the study, the procedure used to gather
data and assure there will be no potential risk or costs involved. Confidentiality of the data was
kept and maintained with integrity and the researcher is responsible for it. There will no
publishing of individual data publicly and only administrative workers who are willing to
volunteer in the study were included.
The researcher will avoid any form of dishonesty during study procedure and data analysis
such as no manipulation of data and writing of the report.

22
3.8 Data Analysis
The questionnaire was divided into 3 parts. Part A consists of Sociodemographic; Part B is
consisting of Nordic Questionnaire and Part C consists of Psychosocial Factors. The
Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire divided into 3 categories including Quantitative
Demand, Cognitive Demand and Social Support Demand with each domain consist of 4
questions.
The descriptive analysis was used to determine The Prevalence of Low Back Pain and Its
Associated Risk Factor of Low Back Pain Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for
Low Back among office workers, Sociodemographic Factor which divided into 3 domain
which is gender, age and job roles and The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire which
divided into 3 domain including Quantitative Demand, Cognitive Demand and Social Support
Demand which each consist of 4 questions.
Meanwhile, the bivariate analysis used an independent T-test to analyze and predict the
association between Gender Factor versus The Prevalence of Low Back Pain and its associated
risk factors. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze and predict the association
between Age and Job Roles factors versus the Prevalence of Low Back Pain and its associated
risk factors. Pearson Correlation was used to analyze and predict the association between
Quantitative Demand, Cognitive Demand versus Prevalence of Low Back Pain and its
associated risk factors.
To present the result in the T-test, Analysis of Variance and Pearson Correlation test were used.
statistical analysis was performed by using IBM statistical Program for Social Science (SPSS)
version 23.0.0.

23
Chapter 4
RESULT AND DATA ANALYSIS
4.1 Response Rate
The study was carried out to determine the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its association
with jo risk factors among office workers at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala Lumpur
(UTM), Malaysia. The data was on the 30th
May 2019. The total number of workers is 19 out
of 20 workers from Pejabat Harta Bina UTM Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
4.2 Descriptive Statistic
Respondents in this research study are composed of 19 people (Initial target is 20, however 1
respondents returned incomplete survey questionnaires) who are currently full time employees
in Pejabat Harta Bina UTM Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The personal profile of the respondents
could be represented in the form of tables and charts based on only 3 factors which are their
Gender, Age Groups and Job Roles regardless to their race, marital status, or education level.
The demographic characteristics of the respondent had been analysed using frequencies,
percentage and counts.

24
4.2.1 The prevalence of Low Back Pain and Low Back Pain Assessment through
NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
The Low Pain Assessment which has to carry out by office workers. In the questionnaire
form, Part B contains 1 question. This part is the workers have to rate in order from Never to
Several times every day.
Table 1 Frequency Table of Low Back Pain Assessment Through NORDIC
Questionnaire for Low Back
Variables Frequency (n) Percentage (%)
Experience ache, pain, discomfort during work
Never 6 31.6
1-2 times last week 7 36.8
3-4 times last week 1 5.3
Once everyday 2 10.5
Several times everyday 3 15.8
From the table 1 Frequency Table of Low Back Pain Assessment Through NORDIC
Questionnaire for Low Back, There 6 or 31.6% answered Never, 7 or 36.8% answered 1-2
times last week, 1 or 5.3% answered 3-4 times last week, 2 or 10.5% answered once every day
and 3 or 15.8% answered Several times every day.

25
4.2.2 The association between Low Back Pain and the sociodemographic factor
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
4.2.2.1 Gender Group
Table 2 shows the distribution of respondents in accordance with their gender. There were 19
respondents in total, with 11 out of 19 being males while 8 are females. This in percentage is
57.9% male, 42.1% female making up the total number of respondents who fully answered the
questionnaire.
Table 2 Frequency Table for Gender Group
Male 11 57.9
Female 8 42.1
Total 19 100.0
Figure 4 Gender Group
58%
42%
Gender Group
Male
Female

26
4.2.2.2 Age group
Table 3 shows the distribution of respondents in accordance with their age groups. There are 2
or 10.5% between the ages of 19 – 24 years old, 6 or 31.6% between the ages of 25 – 31 years
old, 4 or 21.1% between the ages of 32 – 37 years old, 2 or 10.5% between the ages of 38 – 43
years old, 2 or 10.5% between the ages of 44 – 49 years old and 1 or 5.3% who are 56 years or
old or older.
Table 3 Frequency Table for Age Group
Variables Frequency Percent
19 - 24 years old 2 10.5
25 - 31 years old 6 31.6
32 - 37 years old 4 21.1
38 - 43 years old 2 10.5
44 - 49 years old 2 10.5
50 - 55 years old 2 10.5
≥ 56 years old 1 5.3
Total 19 100
Figure 5 Age Group
2
6
4
2 2 2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
19 - 24 years
old
25 - 31 years
old
32 - 37 years
old
38 - 43 years
old
44 - 49 years
old
50 - 55 years
old
≥ 56 years old

27
4.2.2.3 Job Roles
Table 4 shows the distribution of respondents in accordance with their job roles. There are 4
or 21.1% who are Administrators/Managers, 2 or 10.5 are Engineer/ Executive, 2 or 10.5% are
Technician/ Specialist, 5 or 26.3% are Office Clerk, 2 or 10.5% are General Assistance and 4
or 21.1% are others.
Table 4 Frequency Table for Job Roles
Variables Frequency (n) Percent (%)
Administrator / Manager 4 21.1
Engineer/ Executive 2 10.5
Technician / Specialist 2 10.5
Office Clerk 5 26.3
General Assistance 2 10.5
Others 4 21.1
Figure 6 Job Roles
21%
10%
11%
26%
11%
21% Administrator / Manager
Engineer/ Executive
Technician / Specialist
Office Clerk
General Assistance
Others

28
4.2.3 Psychosocial Risk Factor
4.2.3.1 Quantitative Demand
Table 5 Frequency Table of Quantitative Demand
Variables
Frequency
(n)
Percentage
(%)
Work very fast
Always 5 26.3
Often 4 21.1
Sometimes 9 47.4
Seldom - -
Never 1 5.3
Insufficient time to complete all your work tasks
Always 1 5.3
Often 3 15.8
Sometimes 9 47.4
Seldom 4 21.1
Never 2 10.5
workload unevenly distributed
Always - -
Often 5 26.3
Sometimes 6 31.6
Seldom 3 15.8
Never 5 26.3
Do you have to do overtime?
Always 1 5.3
Often 1 5.3
Sometimes 8 42.1
Seldom 1 5.3
Never 8 42.1

29
Table 5 shows the Frequency Table of Quantitative Demand. The quantitative demand consists
of 4 factors. The most affected psychosocial risk factor of quantitative demand for office
workers who work very fast and time to complete all work tasks.
For the work very fast factor, the respondents who sometimes have this factor are 9 with 47.4%,
the respondent who always have this factor is 5 with 26.3 %, the respondents who often have
this factor are 4 with 21.1% and the respondent who never have this factor is 1 with 5.3%.
And then, for the insufficient time to complete all work task factor, the respondent who
sometimes have this factor are 9 with 47.4%, the respondent who seldom have this factor is 4
with 21.1%, the respondents who often have this factor are 3 with 15.8%, the respondents who
never have this factor are 2 with 10.5% and the respondent who always have this factor are 1
with 5.3% .
Next, for the workload unevenly distributed factor, the respondents who sometimes have this
factor are 6 with 31.6%, the respondents who often have this factor are 5 with 26.3%, the
respondents who never have this factor are 5 with 26.3% and the respondent who seldom have
this factor are 3 with 15.8% .
Other than that, for the overtime factor, the respondents who sometimes have this factor are 8
with 42.1%, the respondent who never have this factor is 8 with 42.1%, the respondent who
seldom have this factor is 1, with 5.3%, the respondent who often have this factor is 1 with
5.3% and the respondent who always have this factor are 1 with 5.3%.

30
4.2.3.2 Cognitive Demand
Table 6 Frequency Table of Cognitive Demand
Keep eyes on lots of things while work
Always 5 26.3
Often 4 21.1
Sometimes 5 26.3
Seldom 4 21.1
Never 1 5.3
Work Require remember a lot of things
Always 9 47.4
Often 2 10.5
Sometimes 8 42.1
Seldom - -
Never - -
Work demand that are good at coming up with new ideas
Always 2 10.5
Often 5 26.3
Sometimes 7 36.8
Seldom 2 10.5
Never 3 15.8
Work Require to make difficult decisions
Always 2 10.5
Often 5 26.3
Sometimes 7 36.8
Seldom 2 10.5
Never 3 15.8

31
Table 6 shows the Frequency Table of Cognitive Demand. The cognitive demand consists of
4 factors. The most affected psychosocial risk factor of cognitive demand for office workers
who work require to remember a lot of things.
For the keep eyes on lots of things while work factor, the respondents who sometimes have
this factor are 5 with 26.3%, the respondent who always have this factor is 5 with 26.3 %, the
respondents who often have this factor are 4 with 21.1%, the respondent who seldom have this
factor is 4 with 21.1% and the respondent who never have this factor is 1 with 5.3%.
And then, for the work Require to remember a lot of things factor, the respondent who always
has this factor is 9 with 47.4%, the respondent who sometimes has this factor is 8 with 42.1%
and the respondents who often have this factor are 2 with 10.5%.
Next, for the work demand that are good at coming up with new ideas factor, the respondents
who sometimes have this factor are 7 with 36.8%, the respondents who often have this factor
are 5 with 26.3%, the respondents who never have this factor are 3 with 15.8%, the respondent
who seldom have this factor is 2 with 10.5% and the respondent who always have this factor
are 2 with 10.5%.
Moreover, for the work require to make difficult decisions factor, the respondents who
sometimes have this factor are 7 with 36.8%, the respondent who often have this factor is 5
with 26.3% , the respondent who never have this factor is 3, with 15.8%, the respondent who
always have this factor is 2 with 10.5% and the respondent who seldom have this factor are 2
with 10.5%.

32
4.2.3.3 Social Support
Table 7 Frequency Table of Social Support
Help and support from colleagues
Always 6 31.6
Often 4 21.1
Sometimes 6 31.6
Seldom 2 10.5
Never 1 5.3
Colleagues willing to listen to work related problems
Always 4 21.1
Often 5 26.3
Sometimes 6 31.6
Seldom 2 10.5
Never 2 10.5
Get help and support from immediate superior
Always 2 10.5
Often 6 31.6
Sometimes 7 36.8
Seldom 3 15.8
Never 1 5.3
Immediate superior willing listen work related problems
Always 5 26.3
Often 3 15.8
Sometimes 8 42.1
Seldom 3 15.8
Never - -

33
Table 7 shows the Frequency Table of Social Support. The social support consists of 4 factors.
The most affected psychosocial risk factor of cognitive demand for office workers who
Immediate superior willing listen work related problems .
For help and support from colleagues factor, the respondents who always have this factor are
6 with 31.6%, the respondent who sometimes have this factor is 6 with 31.6 %, the respondents
who often have this factor are 4 with 21.1%, the respondent who seldom have this factor is 2
with 10.5% and the respondent who never have this factor is 1 with 5.3%.
And then, for the colleagues willing to listen to work related problems factor, the respondent
who sometimes has this factor is 6 with 31.6%, the respondent who often has this factor is 5
with 26.3%, the respondent who always has this factor is 4 with 21.1%, the respondents who
seldom have this factor are 2 with 10.5% and the respondents who never have this factor are 1
with 5.3%.
Next, for the get help and support from immediate superior factor, the respondents who
sometimes have this factor are 7 with 36.8%, the respondents who often have this factor are 6
with 31.6%, the respondents who seldom have this factor are 3 with 15.8%, the respondent
who always have this factor is 2 with 10.5% and the respondent who never have this factor are
1 with 5.3%.
Lastly, for the Immediate superior willing listen work related problems factor, the respondents
who sometimes have this factor are 8 with 42.1%, the respondent who always have this factor
is 5 with 26.3%, the respondent who often have this factor is 3, with 15.8% and the respondent
who seldom have this factor is 3 with 15.8% .

34
4.3 Bivariate Analysis
Bivariate analysis is the simultaneous analysis of two variables (attributes). It explores the
concept of relationship between two variables, whether there exists an association and the
strength of this association, or whether there are differences between two variables and the
significance of these differences.
4.3.1 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Low Back Pain Assessment (Nordic)
ANOVA was created and executed to determine the prevalence of Low Back Pain through
Nordic Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
was created and tested Between the assessment and the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its
Associated Risk Factor. Tables 7 below present the result of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
for Age respectively.
Table 8 Analysis of Variance – Nordic
Variable Mean Std. Deviation F Sig-F
Experience ache, pain, discomfort during work 1.332 0.306
Never 42.0 7.07107
1 - 2 times last week 45.7 7.43223
3 - 4 times last week 38.0 -
Once Everyday 53.50 6.36396
Several times everyday 43.3 5.033
From the table 8, the analysis result from the table above, it is shown that the p value of the
group (Nordic) is (0.306) which is more than (0.05). Hence, There is no prevalence of Low
Back Pain and the Low Back Pain Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back
among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.. The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05)

35
4.3.1 T-test for Gender
T-test was created and executed. The purpose of using the T-test is to compare the differences
between the means of the two populations to determine if the null hypothesis should be
rejected. In this data analysis, the T-test was created and tested Between gender (Male and
Female) and the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor. Tables 8 below
present the result of T-test Gender respectively.
Table 9 Independent Sample t-test – Gender
Variable Mean Std. Deviation t Sig-t
Gender -0.086 0.932
Male 44.4545 9.09245
Female 44.75 3.80789
group (Male and Female) is (0.932) which is more than (0.05). Hence, there is no association
between the prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of gender.
The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).

36
4.3.2 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Age
ANOVA was created and executed to determine the association between Low Back Pain and
the sociodemographic factor (Gender, Age and Job Roles) among office workers at Pejabat
Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) was created and tested Between Age group and the prevalence of Low
Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor. Tables 9 below present the result of Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) for Age respectively.
Table 10 Analysis of Variance – Age Group
Variable Mean Std. Deviation F Sig-F
Age 1.277 0.337
19 - 24 years old 46 2.82843
25 - 31 years old 44.5 7.76531
32 - 37 years old 42.75 8.26136
38 - 43 years old 54.5 0.70711
44 - 49 years old 47 1.41421
50 - 55 years old 39 7.07107
≥ 56 years old 36 0.0
group (Age) is (0.337) which is more than (0.05). Hence, there is no association between the
prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Age. The null
hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).

37
4.3.4 Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for Job Roles
ANOVA was created and executed to determine the association between Low Back Pain and
the sociodemographic factor (Gender, Age and Job Roles) among office workers at Pejabat
Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) was created and tested Between Job Roles and the prevalence of Low
Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor. Tables 10 below present the result of Analysis of
Variance (ANOVA) for Age respectively.
Table 11 Analysis of Variance – Job Roles
Variable Mean SD F Sig-F
Job Roles 1.259 0.338
Administrator / Manager 42.5 5.97216
Engineer/ Executive 35.5 3.53553
Technician / Specialist 48 9.89949
Office Clerk 44.4 4.72229
General Assistance 51 9.89949
Others 46.5 8.58293
group (Job Roles) is (0.338) which is more than (0.05). Hence, there is no association between
the prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Job Roles. The
null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).

38
4.3.5 Pearson Correlation for Quantitative Demand
Pearson Correlation was created and executed was executed to to determine the association
between Low Back Pain and the psychosocial factor (quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand,
Social Support Demand) among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Pearson Correlation was created and tested
Between Quantitative Demand and the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk
Factor. Tables 11 below present the result of Analysis of Pearson Correlation for Quantitative
Demand respectively.
Table 12 Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Quantitative Demand
Variables r p
Work Very Fast 0.239 0.324
Insufficient time to complete all work tasks 0.589 0.008
Workload unevenly distributed 0.591 0.008
Overtime 0.176 0.471
Total Quantitative Demand 0.821 0.000
From table 12, the analysis result from the table above, it is shown that the r value of the group
(Work Very Fast) is (0.239) which is less than (1). Hence there is a very weak positive
correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor
in terms of Quantitative Demand. The p value of the group (Work Very Fast) is (0.324) which
is more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Next, the r value of the group (Insufficient time to complete all work tasks) is (0.589) which is
less than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation coefficient relation with the
Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of Quantitative Demand. The p
value of the group (Insufficient time to complete all work tasks) is (0.008) which is less than
(0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Other than that, the r value of the group (workload unevenly distributed) is (0.591) which is
less than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation coefficient relation with the

39
value of the group (workload unevenly distributed) is (0.008) which is less than (0.05). The
null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Moreover, the r value of the group (overtime) is (0.176) which is less than (1). Hence, there is
a very weak positive correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the
psychosocial factor in terms of Quantitative Demand. The p value of the group (Overtime) is
(0.471) which is more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Overall the r value of the total group (Quantitative Demand) is (0.821) which is less than (1).
Hence, there is a strong correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and
the psychosocial factor in terms of Quantitative Demand. The p value of the total group
(Quantitative Demand) is (0.000) which is less than (0.05). Thus, there is prevalence of low
back pain and the psychosocial factor in terms of Quantitative Demand among office workers
4.3.6 Pearson Correlation for Cognitive Demand
Between Cognitive Demand and the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk
Factor. Tables 12 below present the result of Analysis of Pearson Correlation for Cognitive
Demand respectively.
Table 13 Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Cognitive Demand
Variables r p
Keep eyes on lots of thing while work 0.268 0.268
Work require remember a lot of things 0.531 0.019
Work demand that are good at coming up with new ideas 0.650 0.003
Work Require to make difficult decisions 0.750 0.000
Total Cognitive Demand 0.701 0.001

40
(Keep eyes on lots of thing while work) is (0.268) which is less than (1). Hence there is a very
weak positive correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the
psychosocial factor in terms of Cognitive Demand. The p value of the group (Keep eyes on
lots of thing while work) is (0.268) which is more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected
if less than (0.05).
Next, the r value of the group (Work require remember a lot of things) is (0.531) which is less
than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence
of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of Cognitive Demand. The p value of the
group (Work require remember a lot of things) is (0.019) which is less than (0.05). The null
hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Other than that, the r value of the group (Work demand that are good at coming up with new
ideas) is (0.650) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation
coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of
Cognitive Demand. The p value of the group (workload unevenly distributed) is (0.003) which
is less than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Moreover, the r value of the group (Work Require to make difficult decisions) is (0.750) which
is less than (1). Hence, there is a very strong positive correlation coefficient relation with the
value of the group (Work Require to make difficult decisions) is (0.000) which is more than
(0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Overall the r value of the total group (Cognitive Demand) is (0.701) which is less than (1).
Hence, there is a strong correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and
the psychosocial factor in terms of Cognitive Demand. The p value of the total group
(Cognitive Demand) is (0.001) which is less than (0.05). Thus, there is prevalence of low back
pain and the psychosocial factor in terms of Cognitive Demand among office workers at

41
4.3.7 Pearson Correlation for Social Support
Between Social Support and the prevalence of Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor.
Tables 13 below present the result of Analysis of Pearson Correlation for Cognitive Demand
respectively.
Table 14 Pearson Product Moment Correlations for Social Support
Variables r p
Help and support from colleagues 0.268 0.268
Colleagues willing to listen to work related problems 0.339 0.156
Get help and support from immediate superior 0.510 0.026
Immediate superior willing listen work related problems 0.359 0.131
Total Social Support 0.431 0.65
(Help and support from colleagues) is (0.268) which is less than (1). Hence there is a very weak
positive correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial
factor in terms of Social Support. The p value of the group (Help and support from colleagues)
is (0.268) which is more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Next, the r value of the group (Colleagues willing to listen to work related problems ) is (0.339)
which is less than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation coefficient relation with
the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of Social Support. The p
value of the group (Colleagues willing to listen to work related problems) is (0.156) which is
more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).

42
Other than that, the r value of the group (Get help and support from immediate superior) is
(0.510) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a moderate positive correlation coefficient
relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of Social
Support. The p value of the group (Get help and support from immediate superior) is (0.026)
which is less than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Moreover, the r value of the group (Immediate superior willing listen work related problems)
is (0.359) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a very weak positive correlation coefficient
relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial factor in terms of Social
Support. The p value of the group (Immediate superior willing listen work related problems)
is (0.131) which is more than (0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected if less than (0.05).
Overall the r value of the total group (Social Support) is (0.431) which is less than (1). Hence,
there is a weak correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the
psychosocial factor in terms of Social Support. The p value of the total group (Social Support)
is (0.065) which is more than (0.05). Thus, There is no prevalence of Low Back Pain and the
psychosocial factor in terms of Social Support Demand among office workers at Pejabat Harta
Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

43
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION, LIMITATION AND RECOMMENDATION
5.1 Discussion
In this chapter, the results of the research study is analysed, summarized and concluded for
defining the meaning of each statistical result generated by the SPSS System.
5.1.1 Low Back Pain Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back
The most number of respondents with 7 or 36.8% answered 1-2 times last week. Next is 6 or
31.6% answered Never, 3 or 15.8% answered Several times every day, 2 or 10.5% answered
once every day and the least is, 1 or 5.3% answered 3-4 times last week,
The analysis has shown that there is no prevalence of Low Back Pain and the Low Back Pain
Assessment through NORDIC Questionnaire for Low Back among office workers at Pejabat
Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as the p value of
the group (Nordic) is (0.306) which is more than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is accepted for
this first analysis.
5.1.2 Gender Group
The most number of respondents shows 11 out of 19 being males while 8 are females. This in
percentage is 57.9% male, 42.1% female making up the total number of respondents who fully
answered the questionnaire.
The analysis has shown that there is no association between the prevalence of Low Back Pain
and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Gender among office workers at Pejabat Harta
Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as the p value of the
group (Gender) is (0.932) which is more than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is accepted for this
first analysis.

44
5.1.3 Age Group
The most number of respondents are 6 or 31.6% between the ages of 25 – 31 years old and 6
or 31.6% between the ages of 25 – 31 years old, 4 or 21.1% between the ages of 32 – 37 years
old and the least are 2 or 10.5% between the ages of 19 – 24 years old, 2 or 10.5% between the
ages of 38 – 43 years old and 2 or 10.5% between the ages of 44 – 49 years old and 1 or 5.3%
who are 56 years or old or older.
and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Age among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as the p value of the group
(Age) is (0.337) which is more than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is accepted for this second
analysis.
5.1.4 Job Roles
The greatest number of respondents are 5 or 26.3% are Office Clerk, There are 4 or 21.1% who
are Administrators/Managers and 4 or 21.1% are others. The least respondents are 2 or 10.5
are Engineer/ Executive, 2 or 10.5% are Technician/ Specialist, 2 or 10.5% are General
Assistance
and the Sociodemographic factor in terms of Job Roles among office workers at Pejabat Harta
Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia as the p value of the
group (Job Roles) is (0.338) which is more than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is accepted for
this third analysis.
This does not align with previous research conducted by (Spyropoulos, 2008) where 33% of
the responders suffered from Low Back Pain, 37.8% and 41.8% presented with LBP within the
previous one and 2 years respectively, and 61.6% of all office clerks experienced at least one
LBP episode in their lifetime.

45
5.1.5 Psychosocial Factor in Quantitative Demand
The analysis has shown that there is prevalence of low back pain and the psychosocial factor
in terms of Quantitative Demand among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The r value of the total group
(Quantitative Demand) is (0.821) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a strong correlation
Quantitative Demand. The p value of the total group (Quantitative Demand) is (0.000) which
is less than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is rejected for this fourth analysis
5.1.6 Psychosocial Factor in Cognitive Demand
The analysis has shown that there is prevalence of low back pain and the psychosocial factor
in terms of Cognitive Demand among office workers at Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The r value of the total group
(Quantitative Demand) is (0.701) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a strong correlation
Cognitive Demand. The p value of the total group (Cognitive Demand) is (0.001) which is less
than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis is rejected for this fifth analysis
5.1.7 Psychosocial Factor in Social Support
The analysis has shown There is no prevalence of Low Back Pain and the psychosocial factor
(quantitative demand, Cognitive Demand, Social Support Demand) among office workers at
Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The r
value of the total group (Social Support) is (0.431) which is less than (1). Hence, there is a
weak correlation coefficient relation with the Prevalence of Low Back and the psychosocial
factor in terms of Social Support. The p value of the total group (Social Support) is (0.65)
which is more than (0.05). Thus, null hypothesis acceptable for this sixth analysis

46
5.2 Limitation
Although this research was carefully prepared, the research team is still aware of its limitations
and shortcomings. First of all, this study is only based on one group of workers in a private
institution. The small sample size will not be enough to represent all the workers in the country
who are also suffer low back pain associated with job risk factor among insurance and takaful
workers
In spite of the fact that, the questionnaire is well prepared and requires applicants to give true
and honest responses, their actual views cannot be certain.
Gender aspect is also one of the limitations that will occur in this study. The male and female
may have the different feedback and opinions, for example, the female has a lower risk to get
a low back pain as male tend to work longer hours compare to female.
In addition, timing will be another factor that will limit the research team. As certain workers
are away from work, absence due to training, outstation, ongoing sick leave, maternity leave
and fraternity leave. Setting a specified time and venue to meet all the selected respondents
will be an issue. Not every person will be present and even if all respondents attend the
questionnaire session, not everyone will return their answers or answered truthfully and
completely.

47
5.3 Recommendation
5.3.1 Administrative control to Prevent Low Back Pain
5.3.1.1 Ergonomic Risk Assessment
An ergonomic risk assessment used to measure the ergonomic risk in the workplace.
Applying scientific approach to identify ergonomic risk factors, quantify then, and then make
measurable improvement to the work environment as fit as possible in the workplace.
Moreover, it helps to reduce injuries while improving well-being, productivity and morale of
the employees. The assessment must be conducted quarterly for continual improvement. This
task shall be done by an Ergonomic Trained Person to conduct ergonomic risk assessment.
5.3.1.2 Education
Good education is one of the mitigation strategy that is used in the occupational settings in the
workplace. The education are including ergonomic awareness program, weekly safety briefing
meeting, poster implementation, ideal posture during sitting, exercise and stress and pain
management that are effective in minimize employment injuries and reducing low back pain.
5.3.1.3 Anthropometrics
Anthropometry is the measurement of the size and proportions of the human body by
understanding the average of a person is built when designing products for comfort and safety.
Anthropometrics seeks to use these measurements to design workspaces that are as efficient,
as comfortable and as safe as possible.
Figure 7 Anthropometry for Sitting and Standing

48
5.3.2 Ergonomic Assisting Device
5.3.2.1 Footrest
A footrest may not seem as a primary ergonomic accessory, but it does significant ergonomic
benefit. An ergonomic footrest can ease leg problem and lessen lower back pain. A footrest
can improve your blood circulation and other areas of the body. It also improve the employees;s
productivity in the workplace
5.3.2.2 Adjustable Monitor Arm
Monitor arms can reduce neck, back and eye strain and pains that is associated with discomfort.
Being able to adjust a monitor’s height, depth and angle to best position for users’ height and
seating or standing style can a world a difference place in an everyday work environment. In
addition to health benefits, monitor arms can create additional desk space by eliminating
monitoring stand from user’s workspace.
Figure 8 Adjustable Monitor Arm

49
5.3.2.3 Keyboard and Mouse Tray
Keyboard and mouse tray is an attachment to allow users to make specific adjustment to their
typing position, preventing and relieving and repetitive stress injuries, strains and low backs.
Figure 9 Keyboard and Mouse Tray
5.3.2.4 Laptop Stand
Laptop standard are ideal for mobile and laptop users as helps them position their body in the
most comfortable way possible. Laptop stands help reduce strains and discomfort of your
necks, hands and lower back when placed in the right position during work.
5.3.3 Adjustable Office Chair With Lumbar Support
Adjustable chair means the degree to adjust in terms of height, angle, depth and back height
adjustment to it needs. Adjustable chair able helps the employee to adjust to its fit position.
5.2.3.1 Seat Height Adjustment
Height adjustment is typically controlled by a pneumatic cylinder that allow one-touch
adjustment with pull of a lever. Some chairs have a simple screw-type mechanism with a
threaded shaft that works by rotating the chair

50
5.3.3.2 Seat Angle Adjustment
It is an feature where the seat cushion angle to adjust independently of the back rest cushion.
In most cases, the seat cushion can be left to “free-float” to any angle within a certain range,
or it can be locked into one fixed angle.
5.3.3.3 Seat Depth Adjustment
Seat depth adjustment allows it to slide the seat cushion forward or backward. Sliding the
cushion forward result in a deeper seat. It is ideal for tall user with longer legs.
5.3.3.4 Back Height Adjustment
An adjustable back height feature allow the user to raise or lower the back rest cushion to the
most comfortable position. This feature is helpful in moving lumbar support bolstering to just
the right location. However, most office chair use a ratchet system to adjust the back cushion.
5.3.3.5 Back Angle Adjustment
A dedicated back angle adjustment features move the rest cushion angle independently of the
seat cushion. In most cases, the back rest cushion can be left to “free-float” or locked in a fixed
position
Figure 10 Adjustable Chair with lumbar support

51
5.3.4 Psychosocial Risk Factors to Prevent Low Back Pain
5.3.4.1 5S Methodology
In order to get rid of clutter and keep the workstation as tidy as possible, a 5S methodology
must be implement. The 5S Method is a standardized process that when properly implemented
creates and maintains an organized, safe, clean and efficient workplace. The 5S represents
Japanese words that describe the steps of a workplace organization process.
1. Seiri / Sort: Separating of the essential from the nonessential items
2. Seiton / Straighten: Organizing the essential materials where everything has its place
3. Seiso / Shine: Cleaning the work area
4. Seiketsu / Standardize: Establishing a system to maintain and make 5S a habit
5. Shitsuke / Sustain: Establishing a safe and sanitary work environment (Safety)
5.3.4.2 Microbreak
A microbreak is a break that lasts anywhere from 30 seconds to as long as 5 minutes, and is
meant to be taken frequently as often as every 10 minutes. Microbreak helps them to reduce
muscle fatigue during a prolong sitting/standing and increase the workers productivity.
5.3.4.3 Counselling and Reporting
Counselling helps the workers to cope with their condition and behaviour. Motivation and
support helps them to remain sharps without any disturb in their minds during work. Reporting
also helps the workers to get a direct feedback to their superior about their problems.
5.3.4.4 Better working Environment
The working environment must be in an optimal shape. The better working environment
including the lighting, warm colours, ventilation and noise.

52
5.3.4.5 Reward and Recognition
Giving rewards and recognition to the workers can motivate them, enhance team success,
encourages them to exceed their expectation, increase their desire to work smart, maintaining
their self-esteem and increasing their work productivity. In addition, works who received
rewards and recognition are more likely to treat their colleagues with respect and courtesy.

53
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Office worker definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved 1 October 2018,
from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/office-worker
Evolution of The Roles of Office Workers Information Technology Essay. (2016). Retrieved
1 October 2018, from https://www.ukessays.com/essays/information-technology/evolution-of-
the-roles-of-office-workers-information-technology-essay.php?vref=1
Chou, R. (2011). Low Back Pain (Chronic). Retrieved October 29, 2018, from
https://www.aafp.org/afp/2011/0815/p437.html
Low Back Pain Fact Sheet | National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. Retrieved
30 October 2018, from https://www.ninds.nih.gov/Disorders/Patient-Caregiver-
Education/Fact-Sheets/Low-Back-Pain-Fact-Sheet
Nusbaum (2011). Acute Low Back Pain versus Chronic Low Back Pain. Retrieved October
30, 2018, from https://www.backclinicsofcanada.ca/back-clinics-patient-question-of-the-
week-11-12-12/
Maher, C., Underwood, M., Buchbinder, R. (2017). Non-specific low back pain. Lancet
389,736e747. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30970-9.
Ehrlich (2003). Low back pain. Bull World Health Organization, 81(9):671-676.
Vos, T., Flaxman, A., Naghavi, M., Lozano, R., Michaud, C., & Ezzati, M. et al. (2012). Years
lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990–2010: a
systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. The Lancet, 380 (9859),
2163-2196. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(12)61729-2.
Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, Blyth F, Woolf A, Bain C, et al. (2014) The global burden of low
back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Annals of the Rheumatic
Diseases, 73:968–74.

54
Martin, B., Turner, J., Mirza, S., Lee, M., Comstock, B., & Deyo, R. (2009). Trends in Health
Care Expenditures, Utilization, and Health Status Among US Adults With Spine Problems,
1997–2006. Spine, 34(19), 2077-2084. doi: 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181b1fad1
Streenstra IA, Munhall C, Irvin E, Oranye N, Passmore S, Van Eerd D, et al. (2016). Systematic
review of prognostic factors for return to work in workers with sub-acute and chronic low back
pain. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10926-016-9666-x.
Lambeek LC, van Tulder MW, Swinkels IC, et al. (2011). The trend in total cost of back pain
in The Netherlands in the period 2002 to 2007. Spine, 36:1050-8.
Ayanniyi O, Ukpai BO, Adeniyi AF. (2010). Differences in prevalence of self-reported
musculoskeletal symptoms among computer and non-computer users in a Nigerian population:
a cross- sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorder, 11:177.
Janwantanakul P, Pensri P, Jiamjarasrangsri V, Sinsongsook T. (2008) Prevalence of self-
reported musculoskeletal symptoms among office workers. Occupational Medical (London),
58(6), 436-438.
Juul-Kristensen B, Søgaard K, Strøyer J, Jensen C. (2004). Computer users’ risk factors for
developing shoulder, elbow and back symptoms. Scand J Work Environ Health, 30(5):390-
398.
Sitthipornvorakul E, Janwantanakul P, Lohsoonthorn V. (2015). The effect of daily walking
steps on preventing neck and low back pain in sedentary workers: a 1-year prospective cohort
study. Eur Spine J, 24(3):417-424.
Manchikanti, L., Singh, V., Datta, S., Cohen, S., & Hirsch, J. (2009). Comprehensive review
of epidemiology, scope, and impact of spinal pain. American Society Of Interventional Pain
Physicians; 12(4), E35-70. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19668291.
Leboeuf-Yde C, Kyvik KO. (1998). At what age does low back pain become a common
problem? A study of 29 424 individuals aged 12–41 years. Spine, 23:228–234.

55
IJmker S, Blatter BM, van der Beek AJ, van Mechelen W, Bongers PM. (2006). Prospective
research on musculoskeletal disorders in office workers (PROMO): study protocol. BMC
Musculoskelet Disord, 7:55.
Endo, K., Suzuki, H., Nishimura, H., Tanaka, H., Shishido, T., Yamamoto, K. (2012). Sagittal
lumbar and pelvic alignment in the standing and sitting positions. J. Orthopaed. Sci.: official
journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association 17 (6), 682–686.
Astfalck, R., O'Sullivan, P., Straker, L., & Smith, A. (2010). A detailed characterisation of
pain, disability, physical and psychological features of a small group of adolescents with non-
specific chronic low back pain. Manual Therapy, 15(3), 240-247. doi:
10.1016/j.math.2009.12.007.
Ehrlich GE, Khaltaev NG. Low back pain initiative. (1999). Geneva: World Health
Organization.
Franke H, Franke JD, Belz S, Fryer G. (2017). Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low
back and pelvic girdle pain during and after pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
J Bodyw Mov Ther, 21(4):752-62.
Franke H, Franke JD, Fryer G. (2014). Osteopathic manipulative treatment for nonspecific low
backpain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorder, 15:286.
Licciardone JC, Brimhall AK, King LN. (2005). Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low
back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC
Musculoskeletal Disorder, 6:43.
Katz JN. (2006). Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and
consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 88:21-4.
Duthey, B. (2013). Update on 2004 background paper 6.24 low back pain. World Health
Organization.

56
Vianin M. (2008). Psychometric properties and clinical usefulness of the Oswestry Disability
Index. Journal of chiropractic medicine, 7(4), 161-3.
Dawson, A. P., Steele, E. J., Hodges, P. W., & Stewart, S. (2009). Development and Test-
Retest Reliability of an Extended Version of the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ-
E): A Screening Instrument for Musculoskeletal Pain. The Journal of Pain, 10(5), 517–526.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2008.11.008
Thorsen, S. V., & Bjorner, J. B. (2009). Reliability of the Copenhagen Psychosocial
Questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 38(3 suppl), 25–32.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809349859
Dionne, C. (2001). Formal education and back pain: a review. Journal of Epidemiology &
Community Health, 55(7), pp.455-468.
Hoogendoorn, W., van Poppel, M., Bongers, P., Koes, B. and Bouter, L. (2000). Systematic
Review of Psychosocial Factors at Work and Private Life as Risk Factors for Back Pain. Spine,
25(16), pp.2114-2125.
Hoy, D., Brooks, P., Blyth, F. and Buchbinder, R. (2010). The Epidemiology of low back
pain. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, 24(6), pp.769-781
Linton, S. (2000). A Review of Psychological Risk Factors in Back and Neck Pain. Spine,
25(9), pp.1148-1156.
Matsui, H., Maeda, A., Tsuji, H. and Naruse, Y. (1997). Risk Indicators of Low Back Pain
Among Workers in Japan. Spine, 22(11), pp.1242-1247.
Van Tulder, M., Koes, B. and Bombardier, C. (2002). Low back pain. Best Practice &
Research Clinical Rheumatology, 16(5), pp.761-775.
Webb, R., Brammah, T., Lunt, M., Urwin, M., Allison, T. and Symmons, D. (2003). Prevalence
and Predictors of Intense, Chronic, and Disabling Neck and Back Pain in the UK General
Population. Spine, 28(11), pp.1195-1202.

57
Spyropoulos, P., Chronopoulos, E., Papathanasiou, G., Georgoudis, G., Koutis, H., & Kompoti,
A. (2008). Chronic low back pain and function of Greek office workers. Journal of Back and
Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation,21(2), 129-135. doi:10.3233/bmr-2008-21209
Bawab, Wafaa & Ismail, Khouloud & Awada, Sanaa & Rachidi, Samar & Al-Hajje, Amal &
Salameh, Pascale. (2015). Prevalence and Risk Factors of Low Back Pain among Office
Workers in Lebanon. International Journal of Occupational Hygiene.
Janwantanakul, P., Pensri, P., Moolkay, P. and Jiamjarasrangsi, W. (2011). Development of a
risk score for low back pain in office workers - a cross-sectional study. BMC Musculoskeletal
Disorders, 12(1).
Leka, S., Griffiths, A. and Cox, T. (2005), ‘Work-related stress: The risk management
paradigm’, in Antoniou, A. S. G. and Cooper, C. L. (eds.), Research companion to
organisational health psychology, Edward Elgar, Northampton, UK, pp. 174 – 187.
Ryde, G.C., Brown, H.E., Gilson, N.D., Brown, W.J., (2014). Are we chained to our desks?
Describing desk-based sitting using a novel measure of occupational sitting. J. Phys.Active
Health 11, 1318–1323.
Neuhaus, M., Eakin, E.G., Straker, L., Owen, N., Dunstan, D.W., Reid, N., Healy, G.N.,
(2014). Reducing occupational sedentary time: a systematic review and meta-analysis of
evidence on activity-permissive workstations. Obes. Rev. 15, 822–838.
Saragiotto, B.T., Maher, C.G., Yamato, T.P., Costa, L.O.P., Menezes Costa, L.C., Ostelo,
R.W.J.G., Macedo, L.G. (2016). Motor control exercise for chronic nonspecific low-back
pain. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. CD012004 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012004.
Van Middelkoop, M., Rubinstein, S.M., Verhagen, A.P., Ostelo, R.W., Koes, B.W., van
Tulder, M.W. (2010). Exercise therapy for chronic nonspecific low-back pain. Best Pract. Res.
Clin. Rheumatol. 24, 193e204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2010.01. 002.
Conyers, S. (2017). Chronic Pain Awareness. Retrieved 30 January 2019, from
https://www.augustahealth.com/health-focused/chronic-pain-awareness.

58
MAC Tool - Psychosocial risks factors. Retrieved 23 January 2019, from
http://www.hse.gov.uk/msd/mac/psychosocial.htm.
Mental Health - Psychosocial Risk Factors in the Workplace. (2018). Retrieved 23 January
2019, from https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/psychosocial/mentalhealth_risk.html.
Aminian, O., Moradi, A. and Eftekhari, S. (2018). Assessment of psychosocial factors in
office and operational groups of employees of a Regional Electricity Distribution Company
in Iran – A case study. Heliyon, 4(8), p.e00714.
Webb R, Brammah T, Lunt M, et al. (2003). Prevalence and predictors of intense, chronic,
and disabling neck and back pain in the UK general population. Spine, 28(11):1195– 202.
Psychosocial risks in Europe: Prevalence and strategies for prevention - Safety and health at
work - EU-OSHA. (2014). Retrieved 14 January 2019, from https://osha.europa.eu/en/tools-
and-publications/publications/reports/psychosocial-risks-eu-prevalence-strategies-
prevention/view.
Maslach C., Jackson, S. E. and Leiter, M. (1996), Maslach Burnout Inventory Manual, 3rd
ed., Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo Alto, California.

59
APPENDICES
Kajian soal selidik tentang Kelaziman Sakit Belakang dan Faktor Risiko Yang Berkaitan
Pada masa ini, mengekalkan kelaziman kesakitan balakang dan faktor risiko yang berkaitan
adalah salah satu kebimbangan utama dalam pasukan pengurusan dalam mana-mana syarikat.
Oleh itu, untuk mendapatkan nilai sebenar kesakitan sakit belakang dan factor risiki yang
berkaitan dengan pekerja-pekerja di Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala
Lumpur (UTM), Malaysia. Kaji selidik ini dijalankan untuk mengumpul data tentang
kelaziman kesakitan balakang dan faktor risiko yang berkaitan kepada pekerja yang berkerja
di sektor Penjabat Harta Bina UTM.
Kajian in hanya perlu mengambil dalam masa 4 – 5 minit untuk disiapkan. Benar-benar
berjarap anda boleh memberikan jawapan yang tulus kepada kaji selidik ini dan akan disimpan
secara rahsia. Makalumat tersebut akan diproses untuk memenuhi tujuan penyelidikan ini
sahaja. Kerjasama anda dan masa yang dibelanjajan untuk melibatkan diri alam kaji selidik ini
sangat dihargai. Terima kasih
Muhamad Arif Bin Sallehuddin
Pelajar
Bachelors (hons) of occupational safety and health (BOSH) CUCMS
No. matrik: BOSH 1701-7748

60
Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor Survey
Currently, maintaining prevalence of low back pain and its associated risk factor is one of the
main concerns of any corporation’s management team.
therefore, to obtain the real values of the prevalence of low back pain and its associated risk
factor among the employees of Pejabat Harta Bina Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Kuala
Lumpur (UTM), Malaysia. This survey is conducted to collect the data of the prevalence of
Low Back Pain and its Associated Risk Factor employees who work under Pejabat Harta Bina
UTM department.
This survey should only take 4-5 minutes to complete. Really hope that you could provide
sincere answers to this survey and will be kept in the strictest confidentially. Those information
will be processed in order to fulfil this survey’s research questions purpose only
Your cooperation and time spent for involving in this survey is really appreciated. Thank you
Muhamad Arif Bin Sallehuddin
Student
Bachelors (hons) of occupational safety and health (BOSH) CUCMS
matric no: BOSH 1701-7748.

61
Part A (1): Sociodemographic Factor
Fulfill the entire questions that have given by Circle it with only one answer in each question/
Selesaikan keseluruhan soalan yang telah diberikan dengan dan sila Bulatkan. Satu jawapan
dalam setiap soalan.
1. Gender/ Jantina
(a) Lelaki / Male
(b) Perempuan / Female
2. Age / Umur
(a) ≤ 18 years old
(b) 19 - 24 years old
(c) 25 - 31 years old
(d) 32 - 37 years old
(e) 38 - 43 years old
(f) 44 - 49 years old
(g) 50 - 55 years old
(h) ≥ 56 years old
3. Job Roles / Peranan Pekerjaan
(a) Administrator / Manager
(b) Engineer/ Executive
(c) Technician / Specialist
(d) Office Clerk
(e) General Assistance
(f) Others

62
Part B: Nordic Questionnaire (Low Back)
The following questions are about your psychosocial factors. Some of the questions may fit
better to your work than others, but please answer all questions. Soalan berikut adalah tentang
faktor psikososial anda. Beberapa soalan mungkin lebih baik untuk kerja anda daripada yang
lain, tetapi sila jawab semua soalan.
1. During the last work week, how often did you experience ache, pain, discomfort?
(Dalam minggu lepas, berapa kerapkah anda mengalami rasa sakit atau ketidakselesaan semasa
bekerja?)
1 2 3 4 5
Never
1-2 times last
week
3-4-times last
week
Once everyday
Several times
everyday

63
D: Psychosocial Factors
The following questions are about your psychosocial factors. Some of the questions may fit
better to your work than others, but please answer all questions. Soalan berikut adalah tentang
faktor psikososial anda. Beberapa soalan mungkin lebih baik untuk kerja anda daripada yang
lain, tetapi sila jawab semua soalan.
QUANTITATIVE DEMAND
Always Often Sometimes Seldom Never
23) Do you have to work very fast?
24) How often do you not have
time to complete all your work
tasks?
25) Is your workload unevenly
distributed so it piles up?
26) Do you have to do overtime?
COGNITIVE DEMAND
27) Do you have to keep your eyes
on lots of things while you work?
28) Does your work require that
you remember a lot of things
29) Does your work demand that
you are good at coming up with
new ideas
30) Does your work require you to
make difficult decisions
SOCIAL SUPPORT
31) How often do you get help and
support from your colleagues?
32) How often are your colleagues
willing to listen to your work-
related problem
33) How often do you get help and
support from your immediate
superior
34) How often is your immediate
superior willing to listen your
work-related problems
Thank you for spending your time on this research survey questions. After answering the
questions, please return this survey to Associate Prof. Sallehuddin Bin Muhmad .

64
Terima kasih diatas masa yang diluangkan untuk menjawab kesemua soalan kajian selidik ini.
Selepas siap menjawab, sila kembalikan soal selidik ini kepada Associate Prof. Sallehuddin
Bin Muhmad
For more information, please contact researcher at:
Untuk maklumat lanjut, sila telefon nombor ini:
HP: 012-3003462 (Muhamad Arif Bin Sallehuddin) Email: muhdarif20@outlook.com

Prevalence of Low Back Pain And Its Associated Risk Factor Among Office Workers at Pejabat Harta Bina UTM

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Prevalence of Low Back Pain And Its Associated Risk Factor Among Office Workers at Pejabat Harta Bina UTM

Similar to Prevalence of Low Back Pain And Its Associated Risk Factor Among Office Workers at Pejabat Harta Bina UTM (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Prevalence of Low Back Pain And Its Associated Risk Factor Among Office Workers at Pejabat Harta Bina UTM