Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar WorkersNCT07441551
Ergonomic Risk and Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Industrial Workers
An observational study of Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar Workers, run by Istinye University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are among the most common occupational health problems and are closely associated with ergonomic risk factors in the workplace. Different occupational roles expose workers to distinct biomechanical and postural demands, which may influence musculoskeletal health in different ways. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 65 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar Workers
- What is being tested?
- Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise Education
- How many people
- 40 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 15 Apr 2025to 30 Jan 2026
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 65 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Study Population Description The study population consists of full-time blue-collar and white-collar employees aged 18 to 65 years who are working in the same industrial (factory) setting. Participants have been employed in the factory for at least two consecutive years and have maintained their current job position for a minimum of one year. The population represents actively working adults exposed to different occupational ergonomic demands within the same organizational environment.
Who may be able to join
- Aged between 18 and 65 years
- Employed in the same factory for at least two consecutive years
- Actively working in either field-based (blue-collar) or office-based (white-collar) positions
- Full-time employment status
- Maintained the current job position for at least one year prior to assessment
- Willingness to participate and provision of written informed consent
Who cannot join
- Presence of a diagnosed cardiovascular condition contraindicating physical activity
- Orthopedic surgery within the previous 12 months
- Presence of a neurological disorder affecting motor performance
- Acute musculoskeletal injury within the previous 3 months
- Currently receiving structured physiotherapy or rehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions
- Pregnancy at the time of assessment
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study Of Ergonomic Risk And Musculoskeletal Characteristics İn Blue- And White-Collar Workers İn An Industrial Setting
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are among the most common occupational health problems and are closely associated with ergonomic risk factors in the workplace. Different occupational roles expose workers to distinct biomechanical and postural demands, which may influence musculoskeletal health in different ways. Field-based (blue-collar) work is typically characterized by physical workload and repetitive movements, whereas office-based (white-collar) work mainly involves prolonged sitting and static postures.
This cross-sectional comparative study aims to evaluate and compare musculoskeletal characteristics and ergonomic risk levels between blue-collar and white-collar workers employed in the same industrial setting. Full-time employees aged 18-65 years who have been working in the same factory for at least two years are included.
Read more
Outcomes include muscle strength, joint range of motion, ergonomic risk assessed using the Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA), musculoskeletal complaints, body awareness, health-related quality of life, and anxiety levels. Objective measurements and validated self-report questionnaires are used.
Following baseline assessment, individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations are provided as part of a workplace health promotion approach. Participant satisfaction and perceived ergonomic awareness are descriptively evaluated after eight weeks. The findings aim to support occupation-specific ergonomic risk assessment and preventive strategies in industrial work environments.
- Conditions
- Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar Workers
- Being tested
- Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise Education
- Keywords
- Occupational health, Ergonomic risk, Musculoskeletal characteristics, Industrial workers
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise EducationOther
This intervention consists of individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations provided following assessment. The content includes education on optimal working postures, workstation and task-related ergonomic principles, avoidance of prolonged static positions, safe manual handling techniques, and brief workplace-appropriate exercises aimed at promoting musculoskeletal health. The recommendations are delivered as part of a workplace health promotion and awareness approach and are not designed as a therapeutic or experimental intervention. No objective outcome-based effectiveness analysis is conducted.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Industrial Blue-Collar Workers | This cohort includes full-time field-based employees working in physically demanding tasks within an industrial (factory) setting. Participants are primarily involved in manual labor, equipment handling, repetitive movements, and activities requiring dynamic postures. No experimental intervention is applied. Following baseline assessment, participants receive individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations as part of a workplace health promotion initiative. Receives: Other: Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise Education | |
| Industrial White-Collar Workers | This cohort includes full-time office-based employees working in administrative and desk-based roles within the same industrial setting. Participants are primarily exposed to prolonged sitting, static working postures, and computer-based tasks. No experimental intervention is applied. Following baseline assessment, participants receive individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations as part of a workplace health promotion initiative. Receives: Other: Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise Education |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Joint Range of Motion
Active joint range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and upper and lower extremities was measured using a universal goniometer (Hawker et al., 2011).
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Muscle Strength
Hand grip strength was measured using a Jamar hand dynamometer, positioned according to the recommendations of the American Society of Hand Therapists (Mathiowetz et al., 1985). Isometric muscle strength of the deltoid, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, quadriceps, and hamstring muscle groups was assessed using a Lafayette handheld dynamometer (Mentiplay et al., 2015). Three maximal contraction trials were performed for each muscle group and hand grip strength, and the highest value obtained was recorded.
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Muscle Flexibility
Lumbar extensor, hamstring, and gastrosoleus muscle flexibility were evaluated using the sit-and-reach test. The distance between the middle fingertip and the testing surface was recorded in centimeters (Otman et al., 2003).
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Secondary outcomes (6)
Musculoskeletal Complaints
Musculoskeletal symptoms were assessed using the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ), a validated self-report instrument that evaluates the presence, frequency, and severity of musculoskeletal discomfort across multiple body regions. The questionnaire also captures the extent to which discomfort interferes with work performance. Scores are calculated based on frequency, severity, and work interference multipliers, allowing region-specific and total discomfort scores to be derived. Higher scores indicate greater musculoskeletal burden (Hedge et al., 1999). The Turkish version has demonstrated established validity and reliability (Erdinc et al., 2011). In the statistical analyses, the total CMDQ score, reflecting overall musculoskeletal discomfort burden, was used.
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Ergonomic Risk Assessment
Ergonomic Risk Assessment: Ergonomic risk was evaluated using the Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA) method, an observational tool designed to assess whole-body postural risk associated with work tasks. REBA systematically scores trunk, neck, leg, and upper extremity positions, as well as load/force and coupling factors, generating a composite score that categorizes ergonomic risk into different action levels. Higher REBA scores indicate greater postural risk and the need for more urgent ergonomic intervention. Both static and dynamic working postures were directly observed and analyzed in the actual workplace environment. Observations were conducted by the same trained assessor to ensure consistency (Hignett \& McAtamney, 2000[HÇ).
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Quality of Life Assessment
Health-related quality of life was measured using the Short Form-36 (SF-36), a widely used generic instrument consisting of eight subdomains: physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health, bodily pain, general health perception, vitality, social functioning, role limitations due to emotional problems, and mental health. Subscale scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores representing better perceived health status (Ware \& Sherbourne 1992). The Turkish version has demonstrated established validity and reliability (Koçyiğit et al., 1999).
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Anxiety Assessment
Anxiety levels were assessed using the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), a 21-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure the severity of anxiety symptoms. Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale (0-3), yielding a total score ranging from 0 to 63. Higher scores reflect greater anxiety severity (Beck et al., 1988). The Turkish version has demonstrated established validity and reliability (Ulusoy et al., 1998). The instrument has been widely used in both clinical and occupational populations.
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Body Awareness Assessment
Body awareness was evaluated using the Body Awareness Questionnaire (BAQ), which measures an individual's sensitivity to normal bodily processes and internal physiological signals. The scale includes items rated on a Likert-type format, with higher total scores indicating greater body awareness (Shields et al., 1989). The Turkish version has demonstrated established validity and reliability (Karaca et al., 2021). This construct is particularly relevant in occupational settings, as heightened body awareness may influence early recognition of musculoskeletal strain and adaptive behavior
Measured: Baseline (single time point)
Evaluation of Satisfaction and Awareness
A structured questionnaire was developed to assess participants' satisfaction with the educational components and perceived awareness. Participants rated their satisfaction with posture education, ergonomic training, exercise instruction, and information regarding musculoskeletal conditions on a 0-5 scale.
Baseline knowledge regarding ergonomics, work posture, workstation organization, and preventive exercises was assessed prior to education. The same items were re-administered after eight weeks to evaluate perceived changes in awareness. The questionnaire included items related to recognition of potential musculoskeletal risks, ability to identify appropriate working postures, knowledge of ergonomic adjustments, and understanding of preventive exercises.
This evaluation aimed to describe perceived satisfaction and awareness changes rather than to determine objective clinical effectiveness.
Measured: 8 weeks after baseline assessment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Mar 2026
- Study start15 Apr 2025
- Primary completion30 Dec 2025
- Study completion30 Jan 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar WorkersStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Istinye UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Istinye University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Elif Cantürk, MS, Study chair, Istinye University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07441551
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Protocol No: 25-85
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 24 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 2 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 2 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study Of Ergonomic Risk And Musculoskeletal Characteristics İn Blue- And White-Collar Workers İn An Industrial Setting
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07441551
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Protocol No: 25-85
- Conditions
- Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar Workers
- Keywords
- Occupational health, Ergonomic risk, Musculoskeletal characteristics, Industrial workers
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 40 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Istinye UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 15 Apr 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jan 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are among the most common occupational health problems and are closely associated with ergonomic risk factors in the workplace. Different occupational roles expose workers to distinct biomechanical and postural demands, which may influence musculoskeletal health in different ways. Field-based (blue-collar) work is typically characterized by physical workload and repetitive movements, whereas office-based (white-collar) work mainly involves prolonged sitting and static postures.
This cross-sectional comparative study aims to evaluate and compare musculoskeletal characteristics and ergonomic risk levels between blue-collar and white-collar workers employed in the same industrial setting. Full-time employees aged 18-65 years who have been working in the same factory for at least two years are included.
Outcomes include muscle strength, joint range of motion, ergonomic risk assessed using the Rapid Entire Body Assessment (REBA), musculoskeletal complaints, body awareness, health-related quality of life, and anxiety levels. Objective measurements and validated self-report questionnaires are used.
Following baseline assessment, individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations are provided as part of a workplace health promotion approach. Participant satisfaction and perceived ergonomic awareness are descriptively evaluated after eight weeks. The findings aim to support occupation-specific ergonomic risk assessment and preventive strategies in industrial work environments.
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Industrial Blue-Collar Workers | – | Other: Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise EducationThis cohort includes full-time field-based employees working in physically demanding tasks within an industrial (factory) setting. Participants are primarily involved in manual labor, equipment handling, repetitive movements, and activities requiring dynamic postures. No experimental intervention is applied. Following baseline assessment, participants receive individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations as part of a workplace health promotion initiative. |
| Industrial White-Collar Workers | – | Other: Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise EducationThis cohort includes full-time office-based employees working in administrative and desk-based roles within the same industrial setting. Participants are primarily exposed to prolonged sitting, static working postures, and computer-based tasks. No experimental intervention is applied. Following baseline assessment, participants receive individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations as part of a workplace health promotion initiative. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 65 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Study Population Description The study population consists of full-time blue-collar and white-collar employees aged 18 to 65 years who are working in the same industrial (factory) setting. Participants have been employed in the factory for at least two consecutive years and have maintained their current job position for a minimum of one year. The population represents actively working adults exposed to different occupational ergonomic demands within the same organizational environment.
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Aged between 18 and 65 years
- Employed in the same factory for at least two consecutive years
- Actively working in either field-based (blue-collar) or office-based (white-collar) positions
- Full-time employment status
- Maintained the current job position for at least one year prior to assessment
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Presence of a diagnosed cardiovascular condition contraindicating physical activity
- Orthopedic surgery within the previous 12 months
- Presence of a neurological disorder affecting motor performance
- Acute musculoskeletal injury within the previous 3 months
- Currently receiving structured physiotherapy or rehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Workplace Ergonomic and Exercise EducationThis intervention consists of individualized ergonomic and exercise-based recommendations provided following assessment. The content includes education on optimal working postures, workstation and task-related ergonomic principles, avoidance of prolonged static positions, safe manual handling techniques, and brief workplace-appropriate exercises aimed at promoting musculoskeletal health. The recommendations are delivered as part of a workplace health promotion and awareness approach and are not designed as a therapeutic or experimental intervention. No objective outcome-based effectiveness analysis is conducted. | Other | Industrial Blue-Collar Workers, Industrial White-Collar Workers |
Primary outcome
Joint Range of Motion
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Active joint range of motion (ROM) of the cervical spine, lumbar spine, and upper and lower extremities was measured using a universal goniometer (Hawker et al., 2011).
Muscle Strength
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Hand grip strength was measured using a Jamar hand dynamometer, positioned according to the recommendations of the American Society of Hand Therapists (Mathiowetz et al., 1985). Isometric muscle strength of the deltoid, biceps brachii, triceps brachii, quadriceps, and hamstring muscle groups was assessed using a Lafayette handheld dynamometer (Mentiplay et al., 2015). Three maximal contraction trials were performed for each muscle group and hand grip strength, and the highest value obtained was recorded.
Muscle Flexibility
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Lumbar extensor, hamstring, and gastrosoleus muscle flexibility were evaluated using the sit-and-reach test. The distance between the middle fingertip and the testing surface was recorded in centimeters (Otman et al., 2003).
6 secondary outcomes
Musculoskeletal Complaints
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Ergonomic Risk Assessment
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Quality of Life Assessment
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Anxiety Assessment
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Body Awareness Assessment
Time frame: Baseline (single time point)
Evaluation of Satisfaction and Awareness
Time frame: 8 weeks after baseline assessment
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 2 Mar 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Elif Cantürk, MS study chair
Istinye University
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Ergonomic Risk and Work-related Musculoskeletal Characteristics in Blue- and White-collar Workers, run by Istinye University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 2 Mar 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Joint Range of Motion (time frame: Baseline (single time point)). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 2 Mar 2026.