Systematic ReviewEtiology & MechanismsSystematic Reviews & Meta-analysesDiagnosis & AssessmentClinical RelevanceDOI
4 min read
Jump to:

Patient-friendly summary

If you read nothing else

People who worked from home during COVID-19 lockdowns often reported neck, lower back, and shoulder pain, likely linked to long hours of sitting, makeshift workstations, less activity, and stress.

Bottom line

Early, descriptive evidence suggests musculoskeletal pain (especially neck, low back, and shoulder) was commonly reported and may have increased among people working from home during the pandemic, but the small, heterogeneous studies cannot prove cause and warrant cautious interpretation.

Preliminary evidence

Published

2023
3 years ago
Current

Evidence hierarchy

Meta-analysis
Systematic Review ◀ this study
RCT
Cohort
Case-Control
Case Report
Expert Opinion

Study participants

2,835 total participants (1,720 worked from home) across 6 studies20-64 yearsNot reported

Adult workers in work-from-home setups during the COVID-19 pandemic, including many academics/teachers

Full research — for clinicians and curious readers

Study Summary

This rapid review examined the prevalence of musculoskeletal pain symptoms reported among adults forced to work from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Six observational studies (five cross-sectional, one case-control) from Turkey, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines were included, covering 1,720 work-from-home participants out of 2,835 total. The highest reported prevalences were for neck pain (20.3-76.9%), low back pain (19.5-74.1%), and shoulder pain (3.0-72.9%), with the academic sector among the more commonly affected professions. The authors conclude there is initial evidence that musculoskeletal pain prevalence may have increased during pandemic lockdowns, but they emphasize wide prevalence ranges, clinical heterogeneity, and the limitations of rapid-review methodology, urging cautious interpretation.

45/100
Evidence StrengthModerate
Study Quality
Sample Size
Replication

Key Findings

Neck, low back, and shoulder pain were the most commonly reported sitesHigh

Across the six included studies, the highest prevalences were neck pain (20.3-76.9%), low back pain (19.5-74.1%), and shoulder pain (3.0-72.9%); elbow pain had the lowest prevalence (1.3-17.6%). Nine body regions were assessed in all six articles.

Prevalence appeared higher than pre-pandemic estimatesMedium

The review noted pre-pandemic prevalence estimates of roughly 16.2% for neck pain and 11.9% for low back pain, versus 20.3-76.9% and 19.5-74.1% respectively during initial quarantine, which the authors describe as roughly a 20-30% increase. The authors frame this as initial evidence requiring cautious interpretation, not proof of causation.

Work-related factors were correlated with musculoskeletal painMedium

Three studies reported associations: musculoskeletal pain correlated with workstation ergonomic suitability; back pain correlated with time spent sitting, weekly frequency of physical inactivity, and perceived pandemic-related stress; low back pain correlated with disabling effects on daily activities and fear of movement; neck pain correlated with disabling effects on daily activities.

Pre- vs post-pandemic comparisons suggested intensified painMedium

One study reported significantly higher lower back pain among those working from home (73%) versus those continuing status quo (35%) during quarantine; another reported low back pain rising from 38.8% pre-pandemic to 43.8% during quarantine (p = 0.001). The authors state pain severity significantly intensified among those who worked from home.

The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire was the most common measurement toolLow

It was used in three of the six studies; others used the Numerical Rating Scale, a COVID-19 and Back Pain Questionnaire, and the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire. All instruments were administered electronically.

The academic sector was among the more commonly affected professionsLow

Occupations varied (professionals, self-employed, students, housewives, retired individuals), but individuals working in academia (teachers, academics) were the more commonly observed group, indicated in studies covering this population.

Study Methodology
Study Design
Rapid review of observational studies (PRISMA-informed reporting; WHO rapid-review guidance and STARR Decision Tool; JBI-MAStARI critical appraisal and data extraction); narrative synthesis with basic descriptive statistics, no meta-analysis due to clinical heterogeneity. Registered in OSF (osf.io/vxs4w) and PROSPERO (CRD42021266097).
Sample Size
6 included studies (5 cross-sectional, 1 case-control); 2,835 total participants, of whom 1,720 worked from home
Duration
Literature published December 2019-August 2021; last search date August 31, 2021
Population
Adult workers ages 20-64 across various industries (notably academics/teachers) in Turkey, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and the Philippines who were placed in a work-from-home setup due to the COVID-19 pandemic
Outcome Measures
Self-reported prevalence of musculoskeletal pain by body region · Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire · Numerical Rating Scale · COVID-19 and Back Pain Questionnaire · Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire · JBI-MAStARI critical appraisal scores (risk of bias)

Strengths

  • Prospectively registered protocol (OSF and PROSPERO) with PRISMA-informed reporting and use of WHO rapid-review guidance plus the STARR Decision Tool
  • Two independent reviewers conducted searching, appraisal, and extraction with consensus adjudication, using standardized JBI-MAStARI instruments
  • Formal risk-of-bias assessment reported (scores 4-9 of 9, mean 6.0) and transparent about methodological limitations
  • Addresses a timely and under-reviewed occupational/ergonomic gap during the pandemic

Limitations

  • Only six small observational studies were included (five cross-sectional, one case-control), all relying on self-reported, electronically administered questionnaires
  • Wide prevalence ranges and clinical heterogeneity prevented meta-analysis; findings are descriptive and not generalizable
  • Included studies largely used convenience and snowball sampling, and four were judged to have inappropriate recruitment
  • No grey-literature search and a search window ending August 2021 limited the scope of evidence
  • The review reports associations and prevalence, not causation; it cannot establish that working from home caused the increased pain
  • Data on the type, duration, and frequency of sitting breaks were not available in included studies, and direct work-from-home versus onsite comparisons were limited

Key Takeaways for Patients

What This Means for You

  1. 01People working from home during COVID-19 lockdowns most often reported pain in the neck, lower back, and shoulders.
  2. 02Prolonged sitting, physical inactivity, an unsuitable workstation setup, and pandemic-related stress were linked with more musculoskeletal pain in some studies.
  3. 03Reported pain levels appeared higher than pre-pandemic estimates, though the studies varied widely and this review cannot prove that working from home caused the pain.
  4. 04Setting up an ergonomic workspace, taking active breaks that involve changing posture, and staying physically active may help, and the authors suggest workplaces address both ergonomics and mental health.

Read the Full Paper

Access the complete peer-reviewed study from International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine

View Full Study

Related Research

●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Effectiveness of Percutaneous Needle Electrolysis (PNE) and Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation (IMES) in the Management of Myofascial Pain Syndrome and Tendinopathies: A Systematic Review

Trybulski et al.·Journal of Clinical Medicine·2026

This systematic review found that PNE and IMES may improve pain and function in myofascial pain syndrome and tendinopathies, but evidence quality was limited by high risk of bias. Both techniques appear safe with only minor, self-limiting adverse events.

Systematic Reviews & Meta-analysesRead →
●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Dry Needling in Sports and Sport Recovery: A Systematic Review with an Evidence Gap Map

Kużdżał et al.·Sports Medicine·2025

This systematic review of 24 studies found dry needling effectively reduces pain in injured athletes but shows mixed results for performance enhancement in healthy athletes. Significant research gaps exist for elite athletes and long-term effects.

Systematic Reviews & Meta-analysesRead →
●●●●● LandmarkMeta-analysis

Comparative effectiveness of noninvasive therapeutic interventions for myofascial pain syndrome: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Liu et al.·International Journal of Surgery·2024

Network meta-analysis of 40 RCTs found manual therapy, laser therapy, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy most effective for reducing pain and disability in myofascial pain syndrome. These three treatments showed benefits across pain intensity, pressure pain threshold, and functional outcomes comp

Systematic Reviews & Meta-analysesRead →
●●●●● LandmarkSystematic Review

Clinical Effectiveness of Dry Needling in Patients with Musculoskeletal Pain—An Umbrella Review

Chys et al.·Journal of Clinical Medicine·2023

This umbrella review of 36 systematic reviews found strong evidence that dry needling provides superior short-term pain reduction compared to sham treatments across all body regions. DN is equally effective to other treatments and may provide additional benefit when combined with conventional physio

Systematic Reviews & Meta-analysesRead →