hig.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Can home care work be organized to promote musculoskeletal health for workers? Results from the GoldiCare cluster randomized controlled trial
Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU, Trondheim.
Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, NTNU, Trondheim.
Department of Computer Sciences, Applied Mathematics and Statistics, University of Girona.
University of Gävle, Faculty of Health and Occupational Studies, Department of Occupational Health, Psychology and Sports Sciences, Occupational Health Science. University of Gävle, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1443-6211
Show others and affiliations
2025 (English)In: BMC Health Services Research, E-ISSN 1472-6963, Vol. 25, article id 41Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background

Workers in home care have high sick leave rates, predominantly because of musculoskeletal pain. The Goldilocks Work Principle proposes that health should be promoted by a “just right” composition of work tasks. Weekly workloads differ substantially between home care workers, suggesting that certain workers may have workloads that are too high, impacting their musculoskeletal health. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a “GoldiCare” intervention redistributing weekly workloads to become more equal among the homecare workers. Outcomes were pain in the neck/shoulder and lower back, and the implementation of the intervention was also evaluated. 

Methods

A 16-week cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted with 125 workers from 11 home care units, divided into six intervention units and five control units. The operation coordinators of each intervention unit were educated in the Goldilocks Work Principle and provided with a planning tool to facilitate an even distribution of high care need clients. The control group continued their usual work. Primary outcomes were pain intensity in the neck/shoulder and lower back (0 to 10). Secondary outcomes included fatigue (0 to 10), composition of physical behaviors and postures (accelerometers), adherence to the intervention (weekly usage rates of the planning tool), and performance of the intervention (percentage of workers with an even distribution of workload). 

Results

The analysis showed no difference between the intervention and control groups in change in lower back pain (0.07, 95%CI[-0.29;0.43]), neck/shoulder pain (-0.06, 95%CI[-0.49;0.36]) or fatigue (0.04, 95%CI[-0.52;0.61]. No significant changes were observed in the composition of physical behaviors (p=0.067) or postures (p=0.080-0.131) between the two groups. The intervention was succesfully implemented in three units of the six, with adherence ranging from 82-100% across the intervention period. The remaining three units had an adherence of 0-47%. No improvement in performance was observed.

Conclusion

No significant intervention effects were observed on musculoskeletal pain, fatigue, or the composition of physical behaviors and postures. The findings suggest that the intervention was not adequately implemented within the organization. Consequently, we cannot discern whether the lack of positive results were due to poor implementation or an ineffective intervention. Results thus highlight the need for a more comprehensive understanding of organizational structures within home care to facilitate more effective implementations. The hypothetical effectiveness of a fully implemented intervention remains unknown.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer , 2025. Vol. 25, article id 41
Keywords [en]
Goldilocks work, cluster randomized controlled trial, clinical trial, home care, worker health, compositional analysis, Norway
National Category
Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Research subject
Health-Promoting Work
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hig:diva-46199DOI: 10.1186/s12913-024-12133-2ISI: 001392992700003PubMedID: 39773460Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85214260808OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hig-46199DiVA, id: diva2:1922241
Available from: 2024-12-18 Created: 2024-12-18 Last updated: 2025-10-02Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(2030 kB)45 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 2030 kBChecksum SHA-512
ef56e179f1b6f14b43684cfc0e1f46cdc30d165f4b3370858c569f6f1ba23ec56c358055d5d169bf6f9f0d849292b3ed3f2fd2294f129f1842982d182c761895
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Mathiassen, Svend Erik

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Mathiassen, Svend Erik
By organisation
Occupational Health ScienceCentre for Musculoskeletal Research
In the same journal
BMC Health Services Research
Occupational Health and Environmental Health

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 45 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 151 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard-cite-them-right
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • sv-SE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • de-DE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf