DOI: 10.1111/nuf.

12269

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Prevalence of low back pain and associated factors among

nurses in Jordan
Mohammad Suliman BSN, MSN, PhD

Faculty of Nursing, Community and Men-

tal Health Nursing Department, Al al-Bayt
University, Mafraq, Jordan
Correspondence
Mohammad Suliman, PhD, RN, Faculty of Nurs-
ing, Community and Mental Health Nursing
Department, Al al-Bayt University, P.O. Box
130040, Mafraq, 25113 Jordan.
Email: mms189@case.edu
Abstract
Background: Low back pain (LBP) is a significant work-related problem, especially among nurses.
This is due to its high prevalence and impact on the healthcare system, either directly through
treating affected nurses, or indirectly through the decrease in nurses’ productivity.
Aim: The aim of this study is to measure the prevalence rates of LBP among nurses in Jordan, and
to uncover the associated factors and consequences.

Funding information Methods: A cross-sectional design study. Data were collected through a data collection sheet,
AL alBayt University, Grant/Award Number:
developed based on literature, from seven public hospitals and one university hospital over a
2014/2015/9
period of 2 months.

Results: A total of 384 nurses completed the data sheet with a response rate of 76.8%. Current
prevalence of LBP was 69% (n = 265), 1-year prevalence was 78.9% (n = 303), while accumulative
prevalence was 83.6% (n = 321). Factors associated with LBP were older age, female gender, being
overweight, and having longer experience in nursing; 40% of nurses agreed that the LBP increased
their number of sick leaves, 58.7% agreed it lowered their productivity, and 9% reported that it
forced them to change unit.

Conclusion: LBP is a significant work-related problem among Jordanian nurses, with high-
prevalence rates, and debilitating medical and professional consequences. Interdisciplinary
efforts are needed to reduce these consequences.

KEYWORDS
Jordan, low back pain, nurses, prevalence

1 INTRODUCTION
Nurses, given the nature of their profession, are prone to a plethora
of physical and mental problems. Low back pain (LBP) is considered as
one of the most frequently reported work-related problems affecting
nurses.1 LBP is a musculoskeletal disorder that affects bone, muscle,
and the neural system of the back for at least 1 day; it might radiate to
one or both lower limbs in the area between the lower margins of the
twelfth ribs and the lower gluteal folds.2
Many international studies have indicated that LBP is a preva-
lent problem among healthcare workers.3,4 Studies conducted in
Switzerland found that the 1-year prevalence of LBP among health-
care workers was 67.3%; it was highest among nurses (75.6%) and
lowest among support staff (54.9%).3 June and Cho5 found that 90.3%
of the intensive care unit nurses in South Korea experienced LBP at
least once a month. However, only 18.3% of them had sought medical
advice. The prevalence of lifelong LBP among nurses in Taiwan was
82.03%, and the point prevalence was 43.78%.6 Prevalence varied
across the different studies because of differences among the defi-
nitions of LBP, methodologies, and points of prevalence measures.7
Nevertheless, the literature indicates that nurses are a high-risk group
for LBP and longitudinal studies should be conducted to discover the
magnitude of the problem.
The etiology of LBP is determined by several individual and work-
related factors.8 The literature reports many individual factors, such as
genetic predisposition, age, gender, and physical characteristics, beside
many occupational factors, such as stress and workload.2 Bejia et al.,9
found that the main factors associated with reporting LBP among
nurses were older age, female gender, being overweight, being mar-
ried or divorced, smoking, past history of LBP, high workload, multiple
pregnancies, migraine headache, years of experience, and lifting heavy
weights. Similarly, Bandpei et al.,7 identified factors: older age, high
body mass index (BMI), smoking, reporting unhealthy conditions, lack
of assistance, low-job satisfaction, not using prevention strategies, and
years of experience, while Genevay et al.,3 added working under poor
conditions and working for a long time in the same position. A recent

Nurs Forum. 2018;1–7. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/nuf 

c 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 1
2 SULIMAN
systematic review and meta-analysis showed that studies with high-
quality evidence agreed that high-psychosocial demands with low-job
control are highly associated with LBP among nurses.10 Although most
studies have focused on ergonomic factors being related to LBP among
nurses, these studies are considered to be of poor quality due to the
restricted number of settings and because they utilized a convenience
sampling procedure.
Surveys from various countries show that LBP has many conse-
quences on individuals and healthcare institutions. For individuals,
these include restriction of activities and loss of productivity. The
institutional consequences include using up healthcare resources, and
financial burden.2 D'Errico et al.,11 found that the prevalence of pre-
senteeism (attending work despite illness) due to LBP was very com-
mon (58%) among nurses and nurses’ aids in Italy. LBP is responsi-
ble for 3.15% of emergency visits and 65% of injuries sustained at
home.12 Abolfotouh et al.,13 in Qatar found that the outcomes of LBP
included: 18.1% of nurses took sick leave, 34.3% sought medical treat-
ment, 76.8% took days off, and many reduced their daily activities, such
as climbing stairs (50.7%) and walking (42.8%). In this context, the lit-
erature reports that LBP is not an isolated phenomenon; its conse-
quences are reflected in decreased productivity and increased costs.14
In the United States of America, these costs may be as high as $100–
$200 billion annually.15 No figures were available in the literature for
such costs in Jordan.
Few studies have examined LBP and its prevalence in middle- and
low-income countries,2 but such studies are necessary. To our knowl-
edge, there is no published study about LBP among nurses in Jor-
dan. Thus, the present study was conducted to investigate Jordanian
nurses’ reporting: prevalence rates of LBP, its associated factors, its
medical and professional consequences, and the availability of preven-
tive measures in their hospitals. The results will help in identifying the
magnitude of the problem in Jordan, and will be a baseline for future
efforts to decrease the problem of LBP among nurses in the country.
2 METHODS
2.1 Design and sampling
This study used a cross-sectional design and the data were collected
over a period of 2 months from seven public hospitals and one univer-
sity hospital in the north and middle areas of Jordan. Nurses with a min-
imum of 1 year's work experience on a unit/ward were selected using
convenience sampling.
2.2 Data collection sheet
A data collection sheet was developed based on the literature. It
was composed of 40 items that included: demographic data, num-
ber of pregnancies, education level, nursing experience (the amount
of time worked as a nurse), hospital experience, weight, height,
smoking, chronic disease, exercise, work-related conditions (hospitals,
units/wards, number of patients, number of working hours, working
shifts, weight lifting at work), prevalence rates of LBP (current, last
year, accumulative prevalence), pain description (pain acuity, duration,
causes, and radiating or not), medical consequences of LBP (medical
consultation, medication, hospitalization, radiological tests, and opera-
tion), professional consequences (reduced work performance, absence
from work, and change of workplace), and hospitals’ strategies to
protect workers’ backs (availability of preventive equipment, nurses’
training, lifting teams).
Three types of LBP prevalence were measured: (1) current preva-
lence (do you currently have LBP?), (2) year prevalence (during the last
year have you complained of LBP?), and (3) cumulative prevalence (at
any time before last year have you complained of LBP?). Responses
were yes/no for all three questions; if the answer was yes, a Likert
scale that ranged from none of the time to all of the time was used
to measure the duration of pain. The severity of LBP was assessed
using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain
imaginable).16 According to Hoy et al.,2 LBP is defined as pain for at
least 1 day that might radiate to one or both lower limbs in the area
between the lower margins of the twelfth ribs to the lower gluteal
folds. Acute LBP is defined as any LBP that lasts for less than 12 weeks,
and chronic LBP is defined as pain that lasts for 12 weeks or more.
2.3 Data collection procedure
Following ethical approval (from the author's home university review
board, and the participating hospitals’ ethical committee) to carry out
the study, fourth-year nursing students from the author's home uni-
versity were assigned to distribute the data collection sheets to par-
ticipating nurses for completion. Completed sheets were returned to
the unit manager's office, then recollected by the principal investigator.
The students were given full details about the study and the inclusion
criteria for the research subjects. The data collection sheet contained
information about the goals of the study as well as further information,
such as the risks and benefits from the study, and the confidentiality of
the data. All data sheets were collected and stored in the researcher's
office.
2.4 Data analysis
All data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences
version 17 (IBM, Chicago, IL). Descriptive statistics described the
nurses’ demographic data and the prevalence of LBP. Univariate (t-test
and 𝜒 2 test) and multivariate (logistic regression) analysis were used
to answer the remaining research questions. Having pain was coded
as 1, no pain as 0, male gender was coded as 0, and female as 1, being
overweight was coded as 1, and normal weight as 0. The age and work
experience were treated as continuous variables. Alpha level of 0.05
was used to investigate significant findings.
3 RESULTS
3.1 Sample characteristics
A total of 384 out of 500 nurses (response rate = 76.8%) agreed to par-
ticipate and completed the survey from the selected hospitals. Respon-
dents were generally young (M = 32.59, SD = 7.48), approximately
SULIMAN 3

TA B L E 1 Sample characteristics (N = 384) P = 0.007). The prevalence was also higher in overweight nurses

Character Frequency (n, %) (66.7%, n = 202) compared with nurses of normal body weight (32.3%,
n = 98) (𝜒 2 (1, N = 384) = 1.21, P = 0.001). Other individual factors,
Gender
such as smoking, exercising regularly, and having a chronic condition,
Male 127 (33.1)
such as diabetes or hypertension were not significantly associated with
Female 257 (66.9)
LBP (Table 2).
Age
The length of nursing experience was the only professional factor
20–30 years 201 (52.3)
associated with LBP. The results of the t test show that the prevalence
31–40 years 140 (36.5) of LBP was more common in nurses with longer experience in their
41–50 years 42 (10.9) hospitals (M = 7.82, SD = 6.41) than in those with shorter experience
> 50 years 1 (0.3) (M = 6.31, SD = 5.61) (t (383) = 2.08, P = 0.03). The study found that
Marital Status the other occupational factors were not significantly associated with
Single 97 (25.3) LBP: hospital type, place of work, number of working hours per week,
Married 287 (74.7) lifting weight at work, number of patients, and shift type (Table 3).
Nursing experience Logistic regression was performed on variables that turned out to

1–5 years 161 (41.9)
6–10 years 102 (26.6)
> 10 years 121 (31.5)
Hospital type
Ministry of Health 291 (75.8)
University 93 (24.2)
two-thirds (n = 257, 66.9%) were female, and 265 (69.0%) had a bach-
elor's degree in nursing. Other details are shown in Table 1.
3.2 Prevalence rates
At the time of the survey, many nurses complained of LBP, with current
prevalence being 69.0% (n = 265). The 1-year prevalence of LBP was
78.9% (n = 303), the cumulative prevalence was 83.6% (n = 321), and
the prevalence of chronic LBP was 46.4% (n = 178).
3.3 Pain characteristics
Most of the nurses who reported current LBP were female, 70.3%
(n = 213); sufferers’ mean age was 31.88 (SD = 6.93). Approximately 56
of the nurses (14.6%) reported that they had experienced pain every
day over recent years. Many who sought medical advice were diag-
nosed with herniated disc (17.2%, n = 66), spinal stenosis (13%, n = 60),
and sciatica (3.4%, n = 13). On average, nurses reported a moderate
pain of 5.23 (SD = 1.75) on a scale from 0 to 10 (where 0 is no pain, 10 is
the worst pain ever), and 111 (28.9%) reported that the pain radiated
to their lower limbs.
3.4 Factors associated with LBP
The results demonstrated older age, female gender, and being over-
weight were individual factors associated with LBP. The results of the
t test show that the prevalence of LBP was higher in older nurses
(M = 33.38, SD = 7.37) than in younger nurses (M = 27.98, SD = 5.98)
(t (383) = 4.71, P = 0.001). In addition, the results of the 𝜒 2 test show
that the female nurses significantly reported higher prevalence of LBP
(82.9%) compared to the male nurses (70.9%) (𝜒 2 (1, N = 384) = 7.37,
be significant in univariate analysis to assess if these factors were
independently associated with LBP while controlling the confound-
ing effects of other variables. The logistic model contained four inde-
pendent variables (age, nursing experience, gender, and weight). The
full model containing all predictors was statistically significant, (𝜒 2 (4,
N = 384) = 74.03, P < 0.001), indicating that the model was able to dis-
tinguish between nurses who reported LBP and nurses who did not. As
shown in Table 4, all the four variables made a unique statistically sig-
nificant contribution to the model.
The strongest predictor of the four variables was gender, with an
odds ratio of 2.13, 95%confidence of interval (CI) = (1.22, 3.71). This
indicated that female nurses had more than double the chance of hav-
ing LBP compared to male nurses, controlling all other factors in the
model. Nursing experience comes in second place, with an odds ratio
of 1.15, 95%CI = (1.07, 1.23), indicating that, with each additional year
of experience, the nurses are 1.15 times more likely to report LBP, con-
trolling all other factors in the model. In third place comes age, with an
odds ratio of 0.8, 95%CI = (0.74, 0.86), indicating that, for every addi-
tional year of age, nurses are 0.8 more likely to report LBP, controlling
all other factors in the model. The fourth place goes to weight, with an
odds ratio of 0.52, 95%CI = (0.25, 0.63) indicating that, with each addi-
tional kilogram of weight, the nurses are 0.52 more likely to report LBP,
controlling all other factors in the model.
3.5 Low back pain consequences
Many professional and medical consequences of LBP were reported.
Most of the nurses reported an effect on their professional perfor-
mance, such as loss of productivity (47.1%, n = 181), absence from
work (18.2%, n = 70), changing their working area (18.2%, n = 70), or
reducing their activities of daily living (70.3%, n = 270) (see Table 5).
LBP also has medical consequences, for example, seeking medical
advice, consuming analgesics, hospitalization, and having back surgery
(see Table 5 for details).
3.6 Availability of preventive measures
Nurses were also asked about their perception regarding the availabil-
ity of preventive measures for LBP. Most admitted a lack of preventive
4 SULIMAN

TA B L E 2 Individual factors associated with LBP

Factors With LBP (n=303) Without LBP (n=81) Test Test value P-value
Age (M±SD) 33.38±7.37 27.98±5.98 t-test t=4.71 0.001
Gender
Male 90 (70.9) 37 (29.1) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =7.37 0.007
Female 213 (82.9) 44 (17.1)
Weight
Normal weight 98 (32.3) 32 (39.5) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =1.21 0.001
Over weight 202 (66.7) 45 (55.6)
Missing 3 (1.0) 4 (4.9)
Smoking
Yes 81 (26.7) 29 (35.8) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =2.14 0.14
No 222 (73.3) 52 (64.2)
Exercise
Regular 33 (10.9) 12 (14.8) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =0.61 0.43
None or irregular 270 (89.1) 69 (85.2)
Chronic conditions
Yes 43 (14.2) 7 (8.6) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =1.28 0.25
No 260 (85.8) 74 (91.4)

P-value significant at ≤ 0.05.

TA B L E 3 Occupational factors associated with LBP

Factors With LBP (n=303) Without LBP (n=81) Test Test value P-value
Nursing experience (M±SD) 7.82±6.41 6.31±5.61 t-test t=2.08 0.03
Hospital type
Ministry of Health 233 (76.9) 58 (71.6) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =0.98 0.2
University 70 (23.1) 23 (28.4)
Place of work
Floor 171 (56.4) 49 (60.5) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =0.43 0.53
Critical area 132 (43.6) 32 (39.5)
Working hours per week (M±SD) 42.95±9.82 44±11.13 t-test t=−0.83 0.4
Lifting weight
Never 15 (5.0) 5 (6.2) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =1.00 0.65
Sometimes 94 (31.0) 29 (35.8)
Always 194 (64.0) 47 (58.0)
Number of patients (M±SD) 12.82±13.51 12.01±12.42 t-test t=0.63 0.47
Shift worked
Day 153 (50.5) 33 (40.7) 𝜒2 𝜒 2 =2.92 0.23
Night 131 (43.2) 40 (49.4)
Both 19 (6.3) 8 (9.9)

P-value significant at ≤ 0.05.

TA B L E 4 Logistic regression of all significant risk factors

Factors B SE Wald df P Odds ratio 95%CI for Odds ratio

Age 0.23 0.04 35.54 1 0.000 0.80 (0.74, 0.86)
Nursing experience 0.14 0.04 12.26 1 0.000 1.15 (1.07, 1.23)
Gender 0.75 0.28 4.77 1 0.008 2.13 (1.22, 3.71)
Weight 4.19 0.544 59.22 1 0.000 0.52 (0.25, 0.63)

P-value significant at ≤ 0.05.

SULIMAN 5

TA B L E 5 Occupational and medical consequences cumulative prevalence of LBP in our study was 69.0%, 78.9%, and
Consequence Frequency (n, %) 83.6%, respectively. The prevalence of chronic LBP was 46.4%. These

Loss of productivity
results suggest that LBP is an existing and prevalent problem. This is
congruent with other studies that confirmed LBP as a significant prob-
Yes 181 (47.1)
lem among healthcare workers.5,7,9,17,18
No 203 (52.9)
Absence
Yes 70 (18.2) 4.2 Factors associated with LBP
No 314 (81.8)
In our study, age, female gender, and being overweight were the indi-
Change unit vidual factors associated with LBP. Advanced age leads to spinal degen-
Yes 70 (18.2) eration and accumulation of stress over the spinal cord. Also, being
No 314 (81.8) a female makes these degenerative changes more rapid as a result
Reduce daily activity of female hormones.19 Being overweight also increases stress on the
Yes 270 (70.3) lower back, increasing the chance of spinal herniation and compres-
No 114 (29.7) sion. In Jordan, most nurses are relatively young,20 so being over-
Visiting doctor or physiotherapy weight could be the more important factor. For example, more than

Yes 169 (44)

half of the nurses (n = 247, 64%) were overweight (BMI > 25). This
indicates that maintaining nurses’ fitness and normal body weight
No 215 (56)
could be an effective strategy in protecting them from back injuries.
Analgesics for LBP
However, the literature showed conflicting results regarding the asso-
Yes 317 (82.6)
ciation between BMI and suffering from LBP: some studies found
No 67 (17.4)
no relationship at all between being overweight and having LBP,13
Admission to hospital because of LBP
while others did find a relation.18 Different methodologies used could
Yes 33 (8.6) explain the contradicting results.
No 351 (91.4) The univariate analysis revealed that nursing experience was the
Radiology study only professional factor associated with LBP. The multivariate analy-
X-ray 53 (13.8) sis showed that, even after controlling for nurses’ ages, their length of
CT scan 24 (6.3) experience still predicts whether or not they will complain of LBP. The
MRI 48 (12.5) association between more years of practice and suffering from LBP has
None 259 (67.4) been reported in previous studies.5,7 This relationship might explain

Back surgery
Yes 8 (2.1)
No 376 (97.9)
measures in their hospitals. For instance, the majority of nurses, 86.2%
(n = 331), reported that they never attended workshops or training
programs on how to protect their back; the rest of the nurses reported
that these were only for new staff, 6.3% (n = 24), or that they attended
such sessions only once a year, 4.4% (n = 17), with only 1% (n = 4) stat-
ing that they attended such sessions more than once per year. Most
reported that the equipment used in their units was basic, for example,
lifting sheets, 74.7% (n = 287), and only 7.1% (n = 27) reported using
advanced lifting devices, for example, lifting machines. Few had lifting
teams in their units (5.9%, n = 23).
4 DISCUSSION
4.1 Prevalence rates of LBP
This study aimed to measure the prevalence rates of LBP among Jorda-
nian nurses, as well as investigating-associated factors, consequences,
and the availability of preventive measures. The current, last year, and
because with more years of practice, nurses will be exposed to more
events of inappropriate use of the back mechanism and accumulated
back stress. Nurses need to be trained how to use their body mech-
anism effectively and how to maintain an optimal workload. These
strategies could prevent the degeneration of their musculoskeletal sys-
tem that results from work stress over time.
4.3 Consequences of LBP
Our results show that fewer than half of the nurses who partici-
pated in this study, 169 (44%), sought medical advice for their back
pain, whether visiting a doctor or a physiotherapist. Similarly, Bejia
et al.,9 found that only 42% of nurses sought medical treatment, such
as thermal water care and physiotherapy. Thirty-three (8.6%) of our
nurses had been admitted to hospital because of their back pain and
eight (2.1%) of them had undergone back surgery. However, a high-
percentage of them, self-medicated (82.6%), were taking analgesics.
The results demonstrated that, despite the high prevalence of LBP,
nurses depend more on analgesics to overcome their pain. One expla-
nation for this is, because they are in a medical setting, they have an
access to medication or can easily acquire prescriptions from their
doctor colleagues, in addition to their knowledge about medication. In
the case of chronic LBP, nurses should seek medical advice and con-
sider early treatment before their back pain develops into a serious
6 SULIMAN
back injury.21 However, Wong et al.17 found that a low percentage of
healthcare workers (34.1%) sought medical advice, despite having eas-
ier access to medical care.
As nurses are allowed to take sick leave only in situations of seri-
ous pain, only a small percentage (18.2%) of those reporting LBP did
so. One reason could be the shortage of nurses, as there are few sub-
stitute nurses in Jordan.20 Lin et al.,6 found that 87.74% of nurses go to
work despite their back pain. The authors demonstrated that requiring
nurses to work in spite of their back pain could lead to medical errors
and low quality of care.
Although 70.3% of nurses reported a decrease in their daily activ-
ity, only 181 (47.1%) reported that LBP reduced their productivity,
and only 70 (18.2) reported that it forced them to change unit. This is
related to the high percentage (82.6%) using analgesics to overcome
LBP, so they can maintain productivity and not leave their units. Hos-
pital administrations may consider improving working conditions in
order to protect nurses’ musculoskeletal system and improve their job
performance.
4.4 Availability of preventive measures
Nurses were asked about the availability of preventive measures for
LBP in their hospitals. The results show that these were inadequate.
For example, 331 (86.2%) of nurses reported that there were no train-
ing programs about protecting the musculoskeletal system, and 287
(74.7%) reported that the only available lifting equipment was a lift-
ing sheet. Only 27 (7.1%), reported having advanced mechanical lifting
devices in their units. In addition, the majority of nurses, 361 (94.1%),
reported a lack of lifting teams to implement lifting activities in their
units. The results indicated that there was a lack of safety measures in
place to protect nurses from back injuries in Jordanian hospitals.
Burdorf, Koppelaar, and Evanoff22 conducted a systemic litera-
ture review to assess the impact of lifting device use on LBP among
nurses. The researchers found that using lifting devices will reduce
the mechanical load over nurses’ backs that is produced by excessive
physical activities. In addition, the study found complete elimination
of the manual lifting of patients would reduce the prevalence of LBP
by 31.4% in the population at risk. Bandpei et al.,7 stated that provid-
ing prevention strategies to reduce work-related injuries and improv-
ing working conditions would have important social and economic
benefits for healthcare workers. Rasmussen, Holtermann, Mortensen,
Søgaard, and Jørgensen23 found that multi-intervention programs that
include physical training, cognitive behavioral training, and working
in teams will reduce LBP and its consequences. Focusing on Saudi
Arabia, Bin Homaid et al,18 suggested designing interventional pro-
grams to educate nurses on the best methods of preventing back
injuries.
5 LIMITATIONS
This study has some limitations. First, using a self-reporting method
of measuring prevalence rates of LBP among nurses could lead to
recall bias. Self-reporting of preventive measures in particular may
not reflect the exact situation in the hospital, because some nurses
might be unaware of certain hospital resources. Nevertheless, self-
reported data reflects the situation from a nursing point of view. Using
a cross-sectional design is another limitation, which could prevent the
researcher from drawing firm conclusions regarding the risk factors of
LBP; however, this type of design is time-saving and suitable for base-
line studies such as the current one.
6 CONCLUSION
This study is the first of its kind to investigate LBP among nurses in Jor-
dan, and it warns of high-prevalence rates. LBP has associated factors,
such as higher age, being overweight, and long amount of time work-
ing as a nurse (hospital experience). These results suggest an increased
burden on the healthcare system from a decrease in nurses’ produc-
tivity, an increase in days absent, and movement of nurses changing to
different units. More effort from hospital administrations in collabora-
tion with the nurses themselves needs to be dedicated to reduce the
problem of LBP.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research project would not have been possible without the sup-
port of Al al-Bayt University, represented by the Deanship of Academic
Research (Fund Number 7760/2015).
ORCID
Mohammad Suliman BSN, MSN, PhD
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6457-9304
REFERENCES
1. Hoy D, Brooks P, Blyth F, Buchbinder R. The epidemiology of
low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010;24:769–781.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2010.10.002.
2. Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, et al. Measuring the global burden
of low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2010;24:155–165.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2009.11.002.
3. Genevay S, Cedraschi C, Courvoisier DS, et al. Work related
characteristics of back and neck pain among employees of a
Swiss University Hospital. Joint Bone Spine. 2011;78:392–397.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2010.09.022.
4. Skela-Savič B, Pesjak K, Hvalič-Touzery S. Low back pain among
nurses in Slovenian hospitals: cross-sectional study. Int Nurs Rev.
2017;64:544–551.
5. June KJ, Cho S-H. Low back pain and work-related factors among
nurses in intensive care units. J Clin Nurs. 2011;20:479–487.
http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03210.x.
6. Lin P-H, Tsai Y-A, Chen W-C, Huang S-F. Prevalence, characteristics,
and work-related risk factors of low back pain among hospital nurses
in Taiwan: a cross-sectional survey. Int J Occup Med Environ Health.
2012;25:41–50.
7. Bandpei MA, Shirvani M, Golbabaei N, Behtash H, Shahinfar Z, de-
las-Peñas C. Prevalence and risk factors associated with low back
pain in Iranian surgeons. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2011;34:362–370.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2011.05.010.
SULIMAN
8. Yassi A, Lockhart K. Work-relatedness of low back pain in nursing
personnel: a systematic review. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2013;19:
223–244.
9. Bejia I, Younes M, Jamila HB, et al. Prevalence and factors associated
to low back pain among hospital staff. Joint Bone Spine. 2005;72:254–
259. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2004.06.001.
10. Bernal D, Campos-Serna J, Tobias A, Vargas-Prada S, Benavides F,
Serra C. Work-related psychosocial risk factors and musculoskeletal
disorders in hospital nurses and nursing aides: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52:635–648.
11. D'Errico A, Viotti S, Baratti A, et al. Low back pain and associated
presenteeism among hospital nursing staff. J Occup Health. 2013;55:
276–283.
12. Waterman BR, Jr Belmon, PJ, Schoenfeld AJ. Low back pain in
the United States: incidence and risk factors for presentation
in the emergency setting. Spine J. 2012;12:63–70. http://doi.org/
10.1016/j.spinee.2011.09.002.
13. Abolfotouh SM, Mahmoud K, Faraj K, Moammer G, ElSayed A, Abol-
fotouh MA. Prevalence, consequences and predictors of low back
pain among nurses in a tertiary care setting. Int Orthop. 2015;39:
2439–2449.
14. Manchikanti L, Singh V, Falco FJ, Benyamin RM, Hirsch JA. Epidemiol-
ogy of low back pain in adults. Neuromodulation. 2014;17(S2):3–10.
15. Katz JN. Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic fac-
tors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(suppl 2):21–24.
16. McCaffery M, Beebe A. Pain: Clinical Manual For Nursing Practice. St.
Louis, Missouri: Mosby; 1997.
17. Wong TS, Teo N, Kyaw MO. Prevalence and risk factors associated with
low back pain among health care providers in a district hospital. Malays
Orthop J. 2010;4:23–28.
18. Bin Homaid M, Abdelmoety D, Alshareef W, et al. Prevalence and risk
factors of low back pain among operation room staff at a Tertiary
Care Center, Makkah, Saudi Arabia: a cross-sectional study. Ann Occup
Environ Med. 2016;28:1–8.
19. Kalichman L, Li L, Kim D, et al. Facet joint osteoarthritis and low back
pain in the community-based population. Spine. 2008;33:2560–2565.
7
20. AbuAlRub RF. Nursing shortage in Jordan: what is the solution. J Prof
Nurs. 2007;23:117–120.
21. Maher C, Underwood M, Buchbinder R. Non-specific low back pain.
Lancet North Am Ed. 2017;389:736–747.
22. Burdorf A, Koppelaar E, Evanoff B. Assessment of the impact of lifting
device use on low back pain and musculoskeletal injury claims among
nurses. Occup Environ Med. 2013;70:491–497.
23. Rasmussen CD, Holtermann A, Mortensen OS, Søgaard K, Jørgensen
MB. Prevention of low back pain and its consequences among
nurses’ aides in elderly care: a stepped-wedge multi-faceted cluster-
randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:1088.
AUTHOR'S BIOGRAPHY
Mohammad Suliman, BSN, MSN, PhD, is an assis-
tant professor and dean assistant for students
affairs at School of Nursing, Al al-Bayt Univer-
sity, Jordan. He was a staff nurse at King Abdal-
lah University Hospital (2003–2009), AL Ramtha,
Jordan; lecturer at Prince Salma School of Nurs-
ing (2009–2011), Al al-Bayt University, Mafraq, Jordan; and a research
fellow in Harrington Heart and Vascular Institution at University Hos-
pitals (2013–2014) in Cleveland, Ohio. His research projects include
“Prevalence of Low Back Pain Among Jordanian Nurses: An Epidemi-
ological Study,” “Exploring Safety Culture in Jordanian Hospitals: A
Baseline Study,” and “School Nurses Role in Helping Children With
Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorders.”
How to cite this article: Suliman M. Prevalence of low back
pain and associated factors among nurses in Jordan. Nurs Forum.
2018;1–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/nuf.12269