Acceptability of a Multicomponent Intervention for Musculoskeletal Disorders among Blue-Collar Workers in Denmark – a Mixed-methods Feasibility Study

Abstract Background Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) are highly prevalent, and workers with physically demanding work are at increased risk. Evidence-based standardised workplace interventions for MSD remain limited. PATH@work comprises 15 half-hour modules delivered by an occupational safety and health professional over an 8-week period, and includes three components: musculoskeletal health literacy education, physical exercises, and participatory ergonomics. This study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of and worker perceptions of the PATH@work intervention before preceding to a full-scale implementation trial. Methods A mixed-methods convergent feasibility study was conducted across four work teams at four workplaces, including 61 workers (team size 10–19). The primary outcome was acceptability, evaluated at follow-up using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability questionnaire. Secondary, explorative outcomes included self-reported pain intensity (0–10 numeric rating scale) and sickness absence (days during the past month). Six semi-structured interviews using the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability explored the workers’ perceptions and experiences of the intervention. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and qualitative data using the Framework Method. Mixed-method data analysis developed meta-inferences and potential intervention modifications in a joint display. Results Acceptability was high with 98% of the workers replying that they liked the intervention, 95% found it fair to include at the workplace and 95% rated it acceptable overall. However, 41% perceived the intervention burdensome, although qualitative data indicated that participation did not interfere with normal work tasks. The median pain scores were generally low (medians = 0–4) at both baseline and follow-up, and sickness absence was similarly low (median = 0). Qualitative findings indicated a preference for the physical exercise component, while participatory ergonomics was less well received. The workers described a workplace culture with limited openness regarding MSD and highlighted managerial engagement as important for sustained implementation. Conclusion The PATH@work intervention demonstrated high acceptability and was perceived as relevant among blue-collar workers, supporting its feasibility in workplace settings. Participation in participatory ergonomics was influenced by the workplace sociocultural norm as talking openly about MSD was unfamiliar among the workers. Future intervention implementation should strengthen organisational support to enhance participation and intervention sustainability. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT07466680. Registered 03/03/2026. This study is retrospectively registered.