Firefighters, along with other tactical personnel, are at a high risk of work-related physical injury above that of the private sector. The aim of this critical narrative review was to identify, critically appraise and synthesise key findings from recent literature investigating firefighting musculoskeletal injuries to inform injury reduction programs. The methodological approach (search terms, databases, etc.) was registered with PROSPERO and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist with scores graded according to the Kennelly grading system. Levels of evidence were ranked according to the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Of the 8231 studies identified, 17 met the criteria for inclusion. The methodological quality of the studies was ‘fair’ with a level of evidence of III-2. Reported injury rates ranged from 9% to 74% with the lower extremities and back the leading aggregated bodily sites of injury. Sprains and strains were the leading nature of musculoskeletal injury, often caused by slips, trips and falls, although muscle bending, lifting and squatting or muscle stressing were also prevalent. This review may inform injury reduction strategies and given that injuries reported in firefighters are similar to those of other tactical populations, safety processes to mitigate injuries may be of benefit across the tactical spectrum.

Purpose: Low injury rates have previously been correlated with sporting team success, highlighting the importance of injury prevention programs. Recent methods, such as acute:chronic workload ratios (ACWR) have been developed in an attempt to predict and manage injury risk; however, the relation between these methods and injury risk is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to identify and synthesize the key findings of studies that have investigated the relationship between ACWR and injury risk. Methods: Included studies were critically appraised using the Downs and Black checklist, and a level of evidence was determined. Relevant data were extracted, tabulated, and synthesized. Results: Twenty-seven studies were included for review and ranged in percentage quality scores from 48.2% to 64.3%. Almost perfect interrater agreement (κ = 0.885) existed between raters. This review found a high variability between studies with different variables studied (total distance versus high speed running), as well as differences between ratios analyzed (1.50– 1.80 versus ≥ 1.50), and reference groups (a reference group of 0.80– 1.20 versus ≤ 0.85). Conclusion: Considering the high variability, it appears that utilizing ACWR for external (eg, total distance) and internal (eg, heart rate) loads may be related to injury risk. Calculating ACWR using exponentially weighted moving averages may potentially result in a more sensitive measure. There also appears to be a trend towards the ratios of 0.80– 1.30 demonstrating the lowest risk of injury. However, there may be issues with the ACWR method that must be addressed before it is confidently used to mitigate injury risk. Utilizing standardized approaches will allow for more objective conclusions to be drawn across multiple populations.

Several occupations require workers to spend long periods of time driving road vehicles. This occupational task is associated with musculoskeletal disorders. The purpose of this review was to collate, synthesize, and analyze research reporting on musculoskeletal disorders associated with occupational driving, in order to develop a volume of evidence to inform occupational disorder mitigation strategies. A systematic search of academic databases (PubMed, EBSCO host, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) was performed using key search terms. Eligible studies were critically appraised using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklists. A Cohen’s kappa analysis was used to determine interrater agreement between appraisers. Of the 18,254 identified studies, 25 studies were selected and appraised. The mean critical appraisal score is 69% (range 38–100%), with a fair level of agreement (k = 0.332). The studies report that musculoskeletal disorders, most commonly lower back pain, is of concern in this population, particularly in truck, bus, and taxi drivers. Risk factors for these occupations include long hours in a sitting position, years in the profession, vehicle ergonomics, and vibration.

The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the impact of footwear on worker physical task performance and injury risk. The review was guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews protocol and registered in the Open Science Framework. Key search terms were entered into five academic databases. Following a dedicated screening process and critical appraisal, data from the final articles informing this review were extracted, tabulated, and synthesised. Of 19,614 identified articles, 50 articles informed this review. Representing 16 countries, the most common populations investigated were military and firefighter populations, but a wide range of general occupations (e.g., shipping, mining, hairdressing, and healthcare workers) were represented. Footwear types included work safety boots/shoes (e.g., industrial, gumboots, steel capped, etc.), military and firefighter boots, sports shoes (trainers, tennis, basketball, etc.) and various other types (e.g., sandals, etc.). Occupational footwear was found to impact gait and angular velocities, joint ranges of motion, posture and balance, physiological measures (like aerobic capacity, heart rates, temperatures, etc.), muscle activity, and selected occupational tasks. Occupational footwear associated with injuries included boots, conventional running shoes, shoes with inserts, harder/stiffer outsoles or thin soles, and shoes with low comfort scores—although the findings were mixed. Occupational footwear was also linked to potentially causing injuries directly (e.g., musculoskeletal injuries) as well as leading to mechanisms associated with causing injuries (like tripping and slipping).

Objectives Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common disorder which affects the joints. As relationships between occupational factors and lower limb OA have been widely studied in systematic reviews, the aim of this umbrella review was to synthesize their key findings in the risk factors for development of lower limb OA. Methods A systematic search was conducted using the databases PUBMED, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Elton B Stevens Company to identify reviews examining associations between lower limb OA and occupational tasks. These reviews were rated for their methodological quality before key data were extracted and synthesized. Results Sixteen reviews were found, seven pertained to the knee, four to the hip, two to a variety of joints, and three to both the hip and knee. One was deemed to be of high methodological quality, one of critically low methodological quality, and the others of moderate methodological quality. The reviews found moderate to good evidence for heavy occupational lifting to be associated with an increased risk of OA at the knee and the hip. Kneeling, squatting, and climbing, previous injuries to joints, being overweight and obese were also predictive of lower limb OA. Conclusion Occupations which involve heavy physical workloads increase the risk of developing lower limb OA. Heavy lifting, squatting, knee bending, kneeling, and climbing may all increase the risk of developing OA in both the knees and hips. Efforts to reduce exposure to these tasks, reducing joint injuries, optimizing bodyweight may reduce the risks of lower limb OA for occupations which are physically demanding.

This systematic review and meta-analysis identified and critically reviewed the findings of recent studies (last 15 years) examining relationships between specific physically demanding occupations or occupational tasks and development of lower limb osteoarthritis (OA). Twenty-eight studies with 266,227 cases of lower limb OA were included. Occupational tasks contributing to OA included farming, floor laying, and brick laying. Activities significantly contributing to the risk of knee OA were lifting heavy loads (>10 kg/week) (odds ratio [OR] = 1.52, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.29-1.79), squatting/kneeling (OR = 1.69, 95%CI 1.15-2.49), standing (>2 h/daily) (OR = 1.22 95%CI 1.02-1.46) and walking (OR = 1.40 95%CI 1.14-1.73). Lifting contributed significantly to the risk of hip OA (OR = 1.35, 95%CI 1.16-1.57). The effects of occupational exposures appear to be magnified by previous injury and BMI >25 kg/m2. Since specific occupational activities increase OA risk, ergonomist should encourage the use of existing tools, or oversee the design of new tools that may decrease exposure to such activities.