Marras WS, Davis KG, Kirking BC, Bertsche PK, et al.
Ergonomics. Date of publication 1999 Jul 1;volume 42(7):904-26.
1. Ergonomics. 1999 Jul;42(7):904-26. doi: 10.1080/001401399185207.
A comprehensive analysis of low-back disorder risk and spinal loading during the
transferring and repositioning of patients using different techniques.
Marras WS(1), Davis KG, Kirking BC, Bertsche PK.
Author information:
(1)Biodynamics Laboratory, Ohio State University, Columbus 43210, USA.
Although patient handlers suffer from low-back injuries at an alarming rate
worldwide, there has been limited research quantifying the risk for the specific
tasks performed by the patient handlers. The current study used both a
comprehensive evaluation system (low-back disorder risk model) and theoretical
model (biomechanical spinal loading model) to evaluate risk of LBD of 17
participants (12 experienced and five inexperienced) performing several patient
handling tasks. Eight of the participants were female and nine were male.
Several patient transfers were evaluated as well as repositioning of the patient
in bed; these were performed with one and two people. The patient transfers were
between bed and wheelchair (fixed and removable arms) and between commode chair
and hospital chair. A 'standard' patient (a 50 kg co-operative female;
non-weight bearing but had use of upper body) was used in all patient handling
tasks. Overall, patient handling was found to be an extremely hazardous job that
had substantial risk of causing a low-back injury whether with one or two
patient handlers. The greatest risk was associated with the one-person
transferring techniques with the actual task being performed having a limited
effect. The repositioning techniques were found to have significant risk of LBD
associated with them with the single hook method having the highest LBD risk and
spinal loads that exceeded the tolerance limits (worst patient handling job).
The two-person draw sheet repositioning technique had the lowest LBD risk and
spinal loads but still had relatively high spinal loads and LBD risk. Thus, even
the safest of tasks (of the tasks evaluated in this study) had significant risk.
Additionally, the current study represented a 'best' case scenario since the
patient was relatively light and co-operative. Thus, patient handling in real
situations such as in a nursing home, would be expected to be worse. Therefore,
to have an impact on LBD, it is necessary to provide mechanical lift assist
devices.
DOI: 10.1080/001401399185207
PMID: 10424181 [Indexed for MEDLINE]
