Assessment of Musculoskeletal Injuries Associated with Palpation, Infection Control Practices, and Zoonotic Disease Risks among Utah Clinical Veterinarians

Physical stress and musculoskeletal complaints of veterinarians - A narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Veterinarians have high physical workloads. The aim of this narrative review is to evaluate the literature on typical physical workloads, such as lifting/carrying and forced position (during surgery) and predictors of injuries. The health complaints of veterinarians were also examined.

METHODS

Diverse databases were used. Prevalence rates of total workloads (also including surgery), health complaints, musculoskeletal discomfort, and predictors of injury, musculoskeletal disorders, and precaution awareness were examined.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. The most prevalent injury was animal attacks (9%-84%). Working in large and mixed practice types were predictors of injuries or musculoskeletal disorders (e.g., shoulder, lower back, head/neck) compared to other types of practice.

CONCLUSION

The study findings presented here clearly show a high need for intervention to minimize and prevent occupational risks. Ergonomic working conditions and occupational safety training can reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorders.

Occupational Health Hazards Among Veterinarians in Saudi Arabia

Introduction Veterinarians and other professionals who interact with animals on a daily basis encounter an elevated risk of exposure to both known and as-yet-undiscovered microbial agents. Additionally, they are also exposed to physical, chemical, and environmental hazards. Enhancing occupational health and safety in this context carries significant global significance. Methods This study aimed to comprehensively identify and outline the various biological, physical, chemical, and environmental health threats that were encountered by veterinarians in Saudi Arabia. To achieve this, we designed a self-completed questionnaire for 529 participants. The survey encompassed potential occupational hazards such as microbial diseases, injuries resulting from animal bites and scratches, allergies, and environmental risks like sunstroke and dust storms. Results Among the 529 participating veterinarians, 45.9% (243 individuals) reported instances of zoonotic diseases within the past five years. Notably, potential viral agents included Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, avian influenza, and foot-and-mouth disease virus. Bacterial diseases were also frequently documented, with brucellosis (18.7%) and salmonellosis (7.9%) being notable pathogens. Protozoal infections were led by Leishmaniosis, constituting the most commonly detected protozoa (29 /529, 5.5%). Interestingly, 345 (65.2%) of the individuals reported that they have experienced animal bites and scratches. Needle stick injuries were also a common occupational hazard, with an incidence rate of 19.1%. Additionally, chemical exposure was prevalent, particularly to disinfectants (57.5%) and veterinary drugs (23.4%). The study participants also reported their exposure to various environmental hazards, including sunstroke, dust, sandstorms, and heavy rains. Conclusion The findings of this study draw attention to a concerning trend among veterinarians in Saudi Arabia. Their personal health and safety appear to receive inadequate attention, potentially heightening the risk of occupationally related health hazards. These outcomes highlight the need for a reevaluation of safety protocols and infection control practices within the veterinary profession. The implications of this study can potentially inform the development of policies and initiatives aimed at mitigating occupationally related health hazards among veterinarians in Saudi Arabia.

A narrative review of the physiology and health effects of burnout associated with veterinarian-pertinent occupational stressors

Chronic workplace stress and burnout are serious problems in veterinary medicine. Although not classified as a medical condition, burnout can affect sleep patterns and contributes to chronic low grade systemic inflammation, autonomic imbalance, hormonal imbalances and immunodeficiencies, thereby increasing the risks of physical and psychological ill health in affected individuals. Cultural misconceptions in the profession often lead to perceptions of burnout as a personal failure, ideas that healthcare professionals are somehow at lower risk for suffering, and beliefs that affected individuals can or should somehow heal themselves. However, these concepts are antiquated, harmful and incorrect, preventing the design of appropriate solutions for this serious and growing challenge to the veterinary profession. Veterinarians must first correctly identify the nature of the problem and understand its causes and impacts before rational solutions can be implemented. In this first part of two companion reviews, burnout will be defined, pathophysiology discussed, and healthcare and veterinary-relevant occupational stressors that lead to burnout identified.

Large animal veterinarians' knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding livestock abortion-associated zoonoses in the United States indicate potential occupational health risk

OBJECTIVE

To understand large animal veterinarians' knowledge of select zoonotic diseases that cause livestock abortions and identify barriers to using personal protective equipment (PPE).

SAMPLE

A convenience sample of 469 veterinarians currently working with livestock.

PROCEDURES

We sent an electronic survey invitation to large animal veterinarians through various veterinary organizations. Respondents answered questions addressing knowledge and prior experience with select abortion-associated zoonotic diseases, resources available for infection control, attitudes and barriers to PPE use, and demographics.

RESULTS

Median participant age was 49 years (range, 22 to 82 years), and 54% (235/438) were male. Half of veterinarians (185/348) were contacted 5 or fewer times per year to consult on livestock abortions. No veterinarians surveyed answered all questions on zoonotic disease transmission correctly. Personal protective equipment access varied, from 99% (289/290) having access to gloves to 20% (59/290) having access to respirators. Concerns for spreading disease to other animals (136/289 [47%]) and to other humans (108/287 [38%]) ranked as the most common reported motivators for PPE use. Reported barriers to PPE use among survey participants were the inconvenience of taking PPE into the field (101/286 [35%]) and the inconvenience of wearing PPE (97/286 [34%]). Access to PPE was not correlated with PPE use.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Surveyed veterinarians had limited knowledge of transmission of select abortion-associated zoonotic diseases. Incomplete understanding might lead to inappropriate PPE selection, preventable disease exposure, or missed opportunities for client education. Inconvenience was a primary reason PPE was not used.

Veterinarians as a Risk Group for Zoonoses: Exposure, Knowledge and Protective Practices in Finland

Background

Veterinarians may encounter a variety of zoonotic pathogens in their work.

Methods

We conducted two cross-sectional questionnaire studies among veterinarians in Finland. Participants were recruited during two Annual Veterinary Congresses. In 2009, 306 veterinarians participated in an extensive questionnaire study, and in 2016, 262 veterinarians participated in a more focused study that included two same questions.

Results

In 2009, the majority (90.9%) of the participating veterinarians reported having been occupationally exposed to zoonotic pathogens. Zoonotic infections (15.0%), needle stick incidents (78.8%), bites (85.0%), as well as infected skin lesions (24.2%) were reported. In 2009, 8.2% of the participants fully agreed with the statement “I have good knowledge of zoonoses and their prevention”; in 2016, the proportion was 10.3%. The reported use of protective practices and personal protective equipment in connection with specific veterinary procedures indicated that there was room for improvement, particularly in protection from pathogens that are transmissible via inhalation and mucous membranes.

Conclusion

The results confirm that veterinarians are commonly occupationally exposed to zoonotic pathogens. Education should aim to improve and maintain the knowledge of zoonoses and their prevention. Use of protective practices should be advocated.

Ergonomic assessment of veterinarians during performance of bovine reproductive examinations

OBJECTIVE

To identify and quantify potential ergonomic hazards associated with routine reproductive examinations of cattle.

SAMPLE

7 bovine veterinarians.

PROCEDURES

Each veterinarian was observed and videotaped during 2 bovine reproductive examination appointments. During each appointment, a force-matching protocol was used to estimate the entry force used by the veterinarian to insert an arm into a cow's rectum. Veterinarian posture and repetitive movements and the work environment were assessed and quantified during review of the video recordings. Descriptive data were generated.

RESULTS

Of the 14 appointments observed, 9 and 5 involved examination of beef and dairy cows, respectively. For all veterinarians, an arm inclination ≥ 60° was observed during most reproductive examinations. The number of examinations performed per hour ranged from 19.1 to 116.8. The estimated entry force ranged from 121 to 349 N. During all 9 appointments involving beef cows, the veterinarian participated in other tasks (eg, operating overhead levers, opening gates, or assisting with cattle handling) that represented ergonomic hazards.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results confirmed that reproductive examination of cattle exposes veterinarians to various ergonomic hazards involving awkward positions and repetitive and forceful exertions that can contribute to musculoskeletal discomfort and injury, particularly of the upper extremities (neck, shoulders, upper back, arms, elbows, wrists, and hands). Veterinarians frequently participated in other tasks during reproductive examination appointments that exposed them to additional ergonomic hazards. Risk mitigation strategies should prioritize minimizing exposure of veterinarians to tasks not directly associated with the reproductive examination procedure to decrease their overall ergonomic hazard burden.

Risk factors associated with work-preventing musculoskeletal discomfort in the upper extremities of bovine practitioners

OBJECTIVE

To identify risk factors associated with work-preventing musculoskeletal discomfort (MSKD) in the upper extremities (defined as neck, shoulders, upper back, arms, elbows, wrists, and hands) of bovine practitioners.

SAMPLE

116 members of the Western Canadian Association of Bovine Practitioners.

PROCEDURES

Data from a previously described cross-sectional survey of western Canadian bovine practitioners underwent further analysis. The survey, developed to glean information about MSKD in bovine practitioners, was a modified standardized Nordic questionnaire that included questions regarding personal and work characteristics and incidence and location of MSKD during the preceding 12 months along with perceptions about most physically demanding tasks. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with work-preventing upper extremity MSKD.

RESULTS

18 of 116 (15.5%) respondents indicated they had experienced work-preventing upper extremity MSKD during the preceding 12 months. The final multivariable regression model indicated that practice type (mixed animal vs primarily [> 50%] bovine; OR, 3.20; 95% CI, 0.96 to 10.67), practitioner height (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.87 to 0.99), and number of veterinarians in the practice (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.66) were significantly associated with the odds of work-preventing upper extremity MSKD.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that reproductive examination of cattle was not a significant risk factor for upper extremity MSKD in bovine practitioners. Further research into the effects of biomechanical, organizational, and psychosocial workplace factors on the development of MSKD in bovine practitioners is necessary to help inform prevention strategies to foster career longevity in this increasingly diverse practitioner group.

Risk factors and prevalence of work-related injuries and accidents among veterinarians in India

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Veterinary medicine is a high-risk occupation and imparts a risk of physical injuries due to the unpredictable nature of the animals and workplace conditions. This study aimed to identify the associated risk factors and prevalence of work-related injuries, and automobile accidents among veterinarians in India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out among veterinarians (n=565). The responses were recorded using a self-administered questionnaire on work-related injuries, automobile accidents, and physical hazards.

RESULTS

Work-related injuries due to animals in the past 2 years were reported by more than half of veterinarians (prevalence=54.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI]=50.58-58.79), while two-thirds experienced workplace injuries due to animals during any time of their career. The risk for injury was 1.1 times higher (odds ratio=1.1, 95% CI=0.611, 1.981) for veterinarians with a long job duration (>10 years). Large animal practicing veterinarians faced a higher (2.03 times) risk of injury. Workplace absenteeism due to animal-related injury (up to 15 or more days) was reported by 25.9% (95% CI=22.44-29.68) of respondents, including hospitalizations for 7.8% of veterinarians. More than half of veterinarians suffered from automobile injuries (prevalence=60.9%, 95% CI=6.8-64.8) due to work-related travel in the past 2 years, resulting in workplace absenteeism for 56.2% (95% CI=51.46-60.97) of subjects. The prevalence of needlestick injury among veterinarians was very high and reported as 80.9% (95% CI=77.49-83.99). Recapping of needles significantly increased the risk of needlestick injury by 1.67 times.

CONCLUSION

Veterinarians are at risk of work-related injuries, including automobile accidents. Kicking by animals and needlestick injuries were the most frequent physical hazards. Recapping of needles and responding to emergency calls at night were significant risk factors for needlestick injury and automobile accidents, respectively.