The CUPID (Cultural and Psychosocial Influences on Disability) Study: Methods of Data Collection and Characteristics of Study Sample

David Coggon,Ali Sadeghian,Eduardo J Salazar Vega,Ken Cox,Matteo Bonzini,Helen Harcombe,Fernando G Benavides,Nalini Sathiakumar,Panos Bitsios,Anna Cattrell,Eda Merisalu,Florencia Harari,Sarah A Felknor,Rocio Freire,Farideh Sadeghian,Tuuli Sirk,Andrew Gray,David Gimeno,Leda Chatzi,David Mcbride,Consol Serra,Donna M Urquhart,Eleni Solidaki,Ko Matsudaira,Georgia Ntani,Sarah Derett,Manolis Kogevinas,Lope H Barrero,Kristel Oha,Natalia Harari,Rima R Habib,Marianela Rojas,Magda V Monroy,Busisiwe Nyantumbu,Masood Kadir,Sergio Vargas-Prada,Danuta Kielkowski,Michele Carugno,Vanda Elisa Andrés Felli ,Roshini Peiris‐John ,Sudath S P Warnakulasuriya ,Marco Ferrario ,Victor Chee Wai Hoe ,Leonardo Quintana ,Angela Cecilia Pesatori ,María Helena Palucci Marziale ,Leila Maria Mansano Sarquis ,Malcolm Ross Sim ,George L Delclos ,Helen L Kelsall ,Keith T Palmer ,Raúl Harari ,José Miguel Martı́nez ,E Clare Harris ,Rajitha Wickremasinghe ,Noriki Yoshimura

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0039820

Abstract

BackgroundThe CUPID (Cultural and Psychosocial Influences on Disability) study was established to explore the hypothesis that common musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and associated disability are importantly influenced by culturally determined health beliefs and expectations. This paper describes the methods of data collection and various characteristics of the study sample.Methods/Principal FindingsA standardised questionnaire covering musculoskeletal symptoms, disability and potential risk factors, was used to collect information from 47 samples of nurses, office workers, and other (mostly manual) workers in 18 countries from six continents. In addition, local investigators provided data on economic aspects of employment for each occupational group. Participation exceeded 80% in 33 of the 47 occupational groups, and after pre-specified exclusions, analysis was based on 12,426 subjects (92 to 1018 per occupational group). As expected, there was high usage of computer keyboards by office workers, while nurses had the highest prevalence of heavy manual lifting in all but one country. There was substantial heterogeneity between occupational groups in economic and psychosocial aspects of work; three- to five-fold variation in awareness of someone outside work with musculoskeletal pain; and more than ten-fold variation in the prevalence of adverse health beliefs about back and arm pain, and in awareness of terms such as “repetitive strain injury” (RSI).Conclusions/SignificanceThe large differences in psychosocial risk factors (including knowledge and beliefs about MSDs) between occupational groups should allow the study hypothesis to be addressed effectively.

Highlights

Musculoskeletal disorders of the back, neck and upper limb are a major cause of morbidity and disability with substantial economic impact, especially in western countries
Some form of financial compensation for work-related musculoskeletal disorders was available to 40 occupational groups, but 19 groups were ineligible for any special financial support in the event of ill-health retirement
All but nine occupational groups were covered by an occupational health service

Summary

Introduction

Musculoskeletal disorders of the back, neck and upper limb are a major cause of morbidity and disability with substantial economic impact, especially in western countries. Evidence has accumulated for a causal role of ‘‘somatising tendency’’ (i.e. a general tendency to report and worry about common somatic symptoms) [6,9]. Together, these established risk factors do not adequately explain striking temporal changes that have been observed in disability attributed to common musculoskeletal complaints. This paper describes the methods of data collection and various characteristics of the study sample

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion