Intelligent Physical Exercise Training (IPET) in the offshore wind industry: a feasibility study with an adjusted conceptual model

Anne Skov Oestergaard, Louise Fleng Sandal, Trine Fernando Smidt, Karen Søgaard, Anne Skov Oestergaard, Louise Fleng Sandal, Trine Fernando Smidt, Karen Søgaard

Abstract

Background: Good physical health and capacity is a requirement for offshore wind service technicians (WTs) who have substantial physical work demands and are exposed to numerous health hazards. Workplace physical exercise has shown promise for improving physical health and work ability among various occupational groups. Therefore, we aimed to assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of Intelligent Physical Exercise Training (IPET) among WTs in the offshore wind industry.

Methods: A within-subject design was used to assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of IPET (one hour/week individualized exercise during working hours). The intervention period was 12 weeks, with the first eight weeks performed on site as supervised or partly supervised exercise during work hours and the last four weeks planned as home-administered exercise after the seasonal offshore service period. Three assessments, T1 (six months prior to intervention start), T2 (start of intervention) and T3 (end of intervention), of physical health and capacity (self-reported and objective measurements) were conducted and the period between T1 and T2 served as a within-subject control period. Primary outcome was feasibility measured as compliance, adherence, adverse events, and participant acceptability. Descriptive statistics were used to present feasibility outcomes. Preliminary efficacy was reported as mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for health and physical capacity outcomes between T1 and T2, between T2 and T3 and between T1 and T3.

Results: All WTs at the included wind farm (n=24, age: 40 years (SD±8)) participated in the study. No serious adverse events were reported. Compliance and adherence of 95 and 80% respectively, were reached in the eight-week supervised part, but were lower when exercise was home-administered (<20%). Acceptability was high for the supervised part, with 83% indicating that the exercise program worked well and 100% that exercise should be implemented as an integrated part of the working structure. Changes in physical capacity and health indicators, such as VO2max (ml O2/kg/min) at T1 (38.6 (SD±7.2)), T2 (44.1 (SD±9)) and T3 (45.8 (SD±6.5)), may indicate seasonal fluctuations as well as improvements from the intervention.

Conclusion: On-site Intelligent Physical Exercise Training during working hours was feasible and well received among WTs in the offshore wind industry. The proceeding of larger-scale evaluation and implementation is therefore recommended.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT04995718 ). Retrospectively registered on August 6, 2021.

Keywords: Musculoskeletal pain; Offshore wind industry; Wind technician; Workplace exercise.

Conflict of interest statement

ASØ and TFS were employed by the funding company (which did not otherwise influence the outcomes of the study).

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Overview of assessments and cut points used to prescribe individual modes of IPET for WTs. Specific assessments and exercise prescription matrix applied in IPET for WTs. BMI, body mass index; NRS, numerical rating scale
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Specific contents, intensities, and durations of the 1-h exercise program. Overview of generic and individualized parts of the exercise prescription. HRmax, maximal heart rate; Borg, 6–20 point Borg-scale for perceived exertion; RM, repetition maximum (percentage of the maximum weight that can possibly be lifted for one repetition)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Participant flow and timeline. Notes: The first assessment (T1) of physical health and capacity took place just before the beginning of the offshore service season (end February). The second assessment (T2) was conducted after 6 months (August) and marked the beginning of the intervention (IT) period. The exercise IT period was 12 weeks in total (illustrated with a dumbbell), with the first 8 weeks conducted on-site and the last 4 weeks administered at home as illustrated by the offshore turbine and house pictograms, respectively. The final assessment (T3) marked the end of the intervention and was conducted in November (after 9 months). Acceptability was assessed for the on-site part of the intervention, and survey responses were collected after the first 8 weeks of the intervention

References

    1. International Renewable Energy Agency, Future of Wind. 2019. Available from: . ISBN: 978-92-9260-155-3.
    1. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Fastest growing occupations: 20 occupations with the highest percent change of employment between 2019–2029. 2021 Friday, April 9, 2021 [cited 2021 30.08]; Available from: .
    1. Wind Energy Technologies Office. Career Map: Wind Technician. Available from: . Accessed 27 July 2021.
    1. Mette J, et al. Healthy offshore workforce? A qualitative study on offshore wind employees' occupational strain, health, and coping. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5079-4.
    1. Velasco Garrido M, et al. A cross-sectional survey of physical strains among offshore wind farm workers in the German exclusive economic zone. BMJ Open. 2018;8:1–10.
    1. Oestergaard AS, et al. Musculoskeletal disorders and perceived physical work demands among offshore wind industry technicians across different turbine sizes: a cross-sectional study. Int J Ind Ergon. 2022;88:103278. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2022.103278.
    1. Major ME, Clabault H, Wild P. Interventions for the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders in a seasonal work context: a scoping review. Appl Ergon. 2021;94:103417. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103417.
    1. Ross JK. Offshore industry shift work--health and social considerations. Occup Med (Lond) 2009;59(5):310–5. doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqp074.
    1. Parkes, K., Offshore working time in relation to performance, health and safety. A review of current practice and evidence. 2010.
    1. Velasco Garrido M, et al. Musculoskeletal pain among offshore wind industry workers: a cross-sectional study. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2020;93(7):899–909. doi: 10.1007/s00420-020-01544-3.
    1. Preisser AM, McDonough RV, Harth V. The physical performance of workers on offshore wind energy platforms: is pre-employment fitness testing necessary and fair? Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2019;92(4):513–522. doi: 10.1007/s00420-018-1385-5.
    1. Milligan GS, O'Halloran J, Tipton MJ. An ergonomics assessment of three simulated 120 m ladder ascents: a comparison of novice and experienced climbers. Appl Ergon. 2020;85:103043. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103043.
    1. Oestergaard AS, et al. The objectively measured physical demands and capacity of offshore wind service technicians: an observational field study. Appl Ergon. 2022;102:103716. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103716.
    1. Bonjer F, Parmeggiana L. Int Labour Organ. Geneva: International Labour Organisation; 1971. Encyclopedia of occupational health and safety.
    1. Ilmarinen J. Work ability--a comprehensive concept for occupational health research and prevention. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2009;35(1):1–5. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.1304.
    1. Vanni K, et al. Relationship between perceived work ability and productivity loss. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2012;18(3):299–309. doi: 10.1080/10803548.2012.11076946.
    1. Kinnunen U, Natti J. Work ability score and future work ability as predictors of register-based disability pension and long-term sickness absence: a three-year follow-up study. Scand J Public Health. 2018;46(3):321–330. doi: 10.1177/1403494817745190.
    1. Institute, E . A detailed ergonomic assessment of ladder climbing: key risks ( short- and long-term ) to technicians in the offshore wind industry. 2018.
    1. Drain JR, Reilly TJ. Physical employment standards, physical training and musculoskeletal injury in physically demanding occupations. Work. 2019;63(4):495–508. doi: 10.3233/WOR-192963.
    1. Renewable UK, Medical fitness to work - wind turbines . Guidelines for near offshore and land based projects. 2013.
    1. Preisser AM, McDonough RV, Harth V. Fitness to work: a comparison of European guidelines in the offshore wind industry. Int Marit Health. 2016;67(4):227–234. doi: 10.5603/MH.2016.0041.
    1. Sykes K, Roberts A. The Chester step test—a simple yet effective tool for the prediction of aerobic capacity. Physiotherapy. 2004;90(4):183–188. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2004.03.008.
    1. Oil and Gas UK, Medical aspects of fitness for work offshore. Guidance for Examining Physicians. 2008.
    1. Milligan GS, O'Halloran JP, Tipton MJ. A job task analysis for technicians in the offshore wind industry. Work. 2019;63(4):537–545. doi: 10.3233/WOR-192961.
    1. Van Eerd D, et al. Effectiveness of workplace interventions in the prevention of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders and symptoms: an update of the evidence. Occup Environ Med. 2016;73(1):62–70. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2015-102992.
    1. Sjogaard G, et al. Exercise is more than medicine: the working age population's well-being and productivity. J Sport Health Sci. 2016;5(2):159–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jshs.2016.04.004.
    1. Sundstrup E, et al. A systematic review of workplace interventions to rehabilitate musculoskeletal disorders among employees with physical demanding work. J Occup Rehabil. 2020;30(4):588–612. doi: 10.1007/s10926-020-09879-x.
    1. Sjogaard G, et al. The elixir of muscle activity and kinesiology in a health perspective: evidence of worksite tailored exercise training alleviating muscle disorders. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2021;61:102600. doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2021.102600.
    1. Ratamess NA, et al. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009;41(3):687–708. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181915670.
    1. Sogaard K, Jull G. Therapeutic exercise for prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal pain and function. Man Ther. 2015;20(5):631–632. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2015.08.005.
    1. Andersen LL, et al. Effectiveness of small daily amounts of progressive resistance training for frequent neck/shoulder pain: randomised controlled trial. Pain. 2011;152(2):440–446. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.11.016.
    1. Sjogaard G, et al. A conceptual model for worksite intelligent physical exercise training--IPET--intervention for decreasing life style health risk indicators among employees: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:652. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-652.
    1. Eldridge SM, et al. CONSORT 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. BMJ. 2016;355:i5239. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i5239.
    1. Lancaster GA, Thabane L. Guidelines for reporting non-randomised pilot and feasibility studies. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2019;5(1):114. doi: 10.1186/s40814-019-0499-1.
    1. Ogasawara R, et al. Effects of periodic and continued resistance training on muscle CSA and strength in previously untrained men. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2011;31(5):399–404. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-097X.2011.01031.x.
    1. Westcott WL, et al. Prescribing physical activity: applying the ACSM protocols for exercise type, intensity, and duration across 3 training frequencies. Phys Sportsmed. 2009;37(2):51–58. doi: 10.3810/psm.2009.06.1709.
    1. Douma RK, et al. Reference values for isometric muscle force among workers for the Netherlands: a comparison of reference values. BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil. 2014;6(1):10. doi: 10.1186/2052-1847-6-10.
    1. Stroyer J, et al. Validity and reliability of self-assessed physical fitness using visual analogue scales. Percept Mot Skills. 2007;104(2):519–533. doi: 10.2466/pms.104.2.519-533.
    1. Helena Suni J. Retest repeatability of motor and musculoskeletal fitness tests for public health monitoring of adult populations. J. Nov. Physiother. 2014;04(01).
    1. Anderson, A.H., Jessica; Johnson, Brent; Simonson, Anna; and Urquhart, Laurel., Core strength testing: developing normative data for three clinical tests. 2014.
    1. Gauvin MG, Riddle DL, Rothstein JM. Reliability of clinical measurements of forward bending using the modified fingertip-to-floor method. Phys Ther. 1990;70(7):443–7. doi: 10.1093/ptj/70.7.443.
    1. Ilmarinen J. The Work Ability Index (WAI) Occup Med. 2006;57(2):160. doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqm008.
    1. Holtermann A, et al. Worksite interventions for preventing physical deterioration among employees in job-groups with high physical work demands: background, design and conceptual model of FINALE. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:120. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-120.
    1. Kuorinka I, et al. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon. 1987;18(3):233–237. doi: 10.1016/0003-6870(87)90010-X.
    1. Lewis M, et al. Determining sample size for progression criteria for pragmatic pilot RCTs: the hypothesis test strikes back! Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2021;7(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s40814-021-00770-x.
    1. Saltin B, Grimby G. Physiological analysis of middle-aged and old former athletes. Comparison with still active athletes of the same ages. Circulation. 1968;38(6):1104–1115. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.38.6.1104.
    1. Borg E, Kaijser L. A comparison between three rating scales for perceived exertion and two different work tests. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2006;16(1):57–69. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2005.00448.x.
    1. Gram B, et al. Effect of individualized worksite exercise training on aerobic capacity and muscle strength among construction workers--a randomized controlled intervention study. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38(5):467–475. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3260.
    1. Murray M, et al. Self-administered physical exercise training as treatment of neck and shoulder pain among military helicopter pilots and crew: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017;18(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1507-3.
    1. Andersen LL, Zebis MK. Process evaluation of workplace interventions with physical exercise to reduce musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Rheumatol. 2014;2014:761363. doi: 10.1155/2014/761363.
    1. Garne-Dalgaard A, et al. Implementation strategies, and barriers and facilitators for implementation of physical activity at work: a scoping review. Chiropr Man Therap. 2019;27(1):48. doi: 10.1186/s12998-019-0268-5.
    1. Holtermann A, et al. Workplace physical activity promotion: why so many failures and few successes? The need for new thinking. Br J Sports Med. 2021;55(12):650–651. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-103067.
    1. Marshall AL. Challenges and opportunities for promoting physical activity in the workplace. J Sci Med Sport. 2004;7(1 Suppl):60–66. doi: 10.1016/S1440-2440(04)80279-2.
    1. Morgan F, et al. Adherence to exercise referral schemes by participants - what do providers and commissioners need to know? A systematic review of barriers and facilitators. BMC Public Health. 2016;16(1):227. doi: 10.1186/s12889-016-2882-7.
    1. Dalleck L, et al. Does a personalised exercise prescription enhance training efficacy and limit training unresponsiveness? A randomised controlled trial. J Fit Res. 2016;5:15–27.
    1. Wackerhage H, Schoenfeld BJ. Personalized, evidence-informed training plans and exercise prescriptions for performance, fitness and health. Sports Med. 2021;51(9):1805–1813. doi: 10.1007/s40279-021-01495-w.
    1. Androulakis-Korakakis P, Fisher JP, Steele J. The minimum effective training dose required to increase 1RM strength in resistance-trained men: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2020;50(4):751–765. doi: 10.1007/s40279-019-01236-0.
    1. Pollock ML, et al. ACSM position stand: the recommended quantity and quality of exercise for developing and maintaining cardiorespiratory and muscular fitness, and flexibility in healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998;30(6):975–991.
    1. Turner A. The science and practice of periodization: a brief review. Strength Cond J. 2011;33(1):34–46. doi: 10.1519/SSC.0b013e3182079cdf.
    1. Bowen DJ, et al. How we design feasibility studies. Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):452–457. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.02.002.

Source: PubMed

スポンサーと協力者

医学的状態

薬物療法

3
購読する