Systematic review examines prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders in cardiac sonographers, suggesting ergonomic interventions and workload management.
Background Cardiac sonographers (CS) are highly susceptible to work‐related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSD) with over 85% reporting symptoms. To guide targeted prevention efforts, this review investigates the WMSD most frequently experienced by CS and their contributing factors. Methods Studies were eligible if they involved CS, outlined WMSD, or investigated contributing factors. Peer‐reviewed research, systematic reviews, meta‐analyses, case studies, and critical opinion pieces in English with full text availability were included; non‐eligible studies were excluded. The review followed PRISMA guidelines: Medline via the Ovid interface was searched from August 14 to 21, 2024. Data were synthesized using a study specific register and risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tool. Results Five hundred fifty three articles were identified: three screening stages excluded 530, resulting in 23 articles, predominately featuring female and right‐handed scanners. The shoulder, neck, and back emerged as the three most frequent sites of WMSD. Ergonomic factors were commonly associated, including suboptimal scanning posture and inadequate workstation setup. Workload, psychosocial, and sonographer‐related attributes were also implicated. The review was limited by mixed sonographer populations in 13 of the 23 articles included. Discussion Disorders most frequently affected the shoulders, neck, and back of CS, with ergonomic factors commonly implicated. Prevention of WMSD is critical and should prioritise ergonomic training to improve scanning posture and workstation design, alongside workload management and targeted strategies for vulnerable groups. These measures should be supported by conducive work environments and access to mental health resources to reduce future burden and promote prevention.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Borg et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: