Manual patient handling in the healthcare setting: a scoping review

A mixed methods approach to describe the efficacy of lift assist device use to reduce low back musculoskeletal disorder risk factors during three common patient extrication scenarios

This mixed-method study evaluated the efficacy of lift assist device use (Binder®, Eagle®, Maxi Air®) relative to manual lifting/care-as-usual in reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during simulated patient extrication tasks. User feedback was recorded to identify factors that might influence use. Twenty paramedics performed a floor to stretcher lift, lateral transfer, and confined space extrication care-as-usual and with lift assist devices. Use of a lift assist reduced low back muscle activity during floor to stretcher and confined space tasks by 34-47%. Paramedics perceived exertion decreased from 'somewhat hard' to 'light' or 'very light' when using an assistive device. Paramedics noted that ease of use, patient comfort, task time, patient acuity, among other considerations would influence use decisions. Lift assist devices were efficacious at reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during floor to stretcher and patient extrication tasks.

Exploring Musculoskeletal Injuries Among Informal and Formal Carers of People With Dementia

BACKGROUND

Carers of people with dementia manually handle the care recipients (eg, repetitive lifting, transferring, and pulling) as part of the care service, increasing the musculoskeletal injury risk to themselves.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries among informal and formal carers of people with dementia and the perceived associated risk factors.

METHODS

Primary carers of people with dementia (26 males and 141 females) from Dementia Care Centers and Home Care programs completed a questionnaire providing information about (a) the carers' and their care recipients' characteristics, (b) musculoskeletal symptoms (via the Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire) and related aspects, and (c) the caregiving activities exposing the carers to risk of musculoskeletal injury.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 69.7% of informal and 86.7% of formal carers reported having more than 1 musculoskeletal injury, while 63.1% and 61.5%, respectively, reported having a musculoskeletal injury in the last year. Lower back had the highest injury prevalence (>10% for both groups). The 2 carer groups were not different in any of the variables.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results reinforce calls for education and support of carers, regardless of their formal status, to enable injury-free and prolonged service provision.

Patient handling training interventions and musculoskeletal injuries in healthcare workers: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Workplace injuries are a serious issue for the health and social care industry, with the sector accounting for 20 % of all serious claims reported. The aim of this systematic review was to determine whether patient handling training interventions that included instruction on patient transfer techniques are effective in preventing musculoskeletal injuries in healthcare workers. Methods: Electronic databases MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and Health and Safety Science Abstracts (ProQuest) were searched for controlled trials from January 1996-August 2022. Risk of bias was evaluated using the PEDro scale and overall certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation for each meta-analysis. Results: A total of nine studies (3903 participants) were included. There is moderate certainty evidence that could not conclude whether patient handling training affects the 12-month incidence of lower back pain (OR = 0.83, 95 % CI [0.59, 1.16]). There is low certainty evidence that patient handing training does not prevent lower back pain in health professionals without pre-existing pain (MD = -0.06, 95 % CI [-0.63, 0.52]) but may reduce lower back pain in those with pre-existing pain (MD = -2.92, 95 % CI [-5.44, -0.41]). The results also suggest that there may be a positive effect of training incorporating risk assessment on musculoskeletal injury rates; however the evidence is of very low certainty. There is low certainty evidence from a single study that training may have a short-term effect on sickness absences.) Conclusions: There is a lack of evidence to support patient handling training when delivered to all healthcare staff. Training in its current form may be an ineffective strategy for reducing musculoskeletal injuries and pain. High quality disinvestment studies or trials incorporating risk assessment strategies are warranted. Practical Applications: This review suggests health service managers question the effectiveness of current patient handling training practices and consider evaluating current practices before allocating resources to meet employee risk reduction obligations.

Manual patient handling in the healthcare setting: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Manual patient handling is the most frequently reported risk factor for work related musculoskeletal disorders in healthcare. Patient handling tasks are routinely performed manually without assistive devices and can create awkward postures and high loads for nurses and allied health professionals (AHPs). However, AHPs, notably physiotherapists, also utilize therapeutic handling to facilitate patient movement during rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVES

To comprehensively map the literature surrounding manual patient handling (without assistive devices) by healthcare practitioners.

METHODS

AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and EMBASE databases were searched. Grey literature was sourced from Google Scholar, EThOS, Open Grey, Health and Safety Executive, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and Work Safe Australia. Literature published in English between 2002 and 2021 was included.

RESULTS

Forty-nine records were included: 36 primary research studies, 1 systematic review and 12 'other' including narrative and government reports. Primary research was predominantly observational cross-sectional (n = 21). The most common settings included laboratories (n = 13) and hospitals (n = 13). Seven research questions were identified, with patient handling practices (n = 13) the most common. Nurses formed the largest practitioner population (n = 13) and patients were often simulated (n = 12). Common outcomes included tasks performed (n = 13) and physical demands during patient handling (n = 13).

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

This comprehensive scoping review identified that most research was observational, investigating nurses in hospitals or laboratories. More research on manual patient handling by AHPs and investigation of the biomechanics involved in therapeutic handling is needed. Further qualitative research would allow for greater understanding of manual patient handling practices within healthcare. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.