Differential Effectiveness of the Minnesota Safe Patient Handling Act by Health Care Setting

The Minnesota Safe Patient Handling (SPH) Act requires nursing homes, hospitals, and outpatient facilities to develop comprehensive SPH programs and acquire mechanical lifts. The law was designed to prevent the adverse outcomes of manual patient handling among workers (e.g., musculoskeletal injuries) and care recipients (e.g., falls, skin tears). Reducing manual handling is of particular concern in nursing homes where residents’ care needs necessitate frequent lifts and transfers. To date, research has focused on the effects of SPH laws separately in nursing homes and hospitals. Our study aimed to assess whether change in worker injury rate differed between nursing homes and other health care settings following enactment of the 2007 Minnesota law. We used 2005-2017 claims data from a large workers’ compensation insurer and assessed the effects of time, health care setting, and their interaction on claim rate using negative binomial regression models. The claim rate for patient handling injuries was highest in nursing homes (2.8/million payroll), followed by hospitals (1.4/million payroll), and outpatient facilities (0.04/million payroll). Across settings, patient handling claims declined by 38% (95% CI 19-53%) between pre-law (2005-2007) and post-implementation (2014-2017). The decline in claims over time did not differ by health care setting (Wald χ2 for interaction=3.40, p=0.758). Our results suggest that nursing homes are successfully addressing the unique mobility needs of their residents in their mandated SPH programs. Future work should seek to describe the magnitude and nature of care recipient injuries caused by lifting and transferring and evaluate trends in care recipient injuries over time.

Evaluating Safe Patient Handling Systems: Is There a Better Way?

<p>The literature presented here shows that injuries suffered by staff and patients due to patient handling are preventable but patient handling injuries to health care workers and patients remain a costly problem to health care organizations in many countries. "No Lifting" patient handling policies have been adopted yet health care organizations currently sit amongst the top three worst performing industries in terms of disabling injuries to their employees. A factor that contributes to this situation is the lack of tools for evaluating patient handling systems including workplace culture and climate. This observational study analyzes the responses of 38 nurses from two similar units that use different patient handling systems to test the reliability and validity of the Safe Patient Handling Survey (TM) SPH Survey(TM), a perception survey and improvement tool for employees and employers. The survey contains 55 questions divided into 6 clusters, staff and patient injury and violence questions, and picture questions depicting unsafe techniques. The data were analyzed to see how the SPH Survey(TM) scores correlate with incidents, and its ability to detect differences between the two units. The results of the Pearson and Cronbach(TM) alpha tests show strong reliability, validity and consistency of the SPH Survey(TM). ANOVA comparison of means and Spearman(TM) rho tests shows that higher (better) scores on the SPH Survey(TM) clusters correlate with lower numbers of patient injuries, lower reports of verbal and physical violence episodes, and lower staff injuries. Differences were detected between the units with Unit 2 scoring higher than Unit 1 in all SPH Survey(TM) clusters and scoring lower in staff and patient injuries and violence incidents. Although the analysis was limited by the small sample size, the study has created a sound basis for further investigation. Health care organizations, unions, government bodies, insurers, educational institutions, and researchers must continue to reduce patient handling risk for both health care workers and for patients. The SPH Survey(TM) is shown to be an easy way to reliably evaluate patient handling systems and workplace culture, target improvement initiatives, and continually monitor the level of patient handling risk in the workplace. Low-risk patient handling gives health care providers the means to focus on delivering high quality patient care, without endangering their own health and well-being.</p>

Evaluating Safe Patient Handling Systems: Is There a Better Way?

<p>The literature presented here shows that injuries suffered by staff and patients due to patient handling are preventable but patient handling injuries to health care workers and patients remain a costly problem to health care organizations in many countries. "No Lifting" patient handling policies have been adopted yet health care organizations currently sit amongst the top three worst performing industries in terms of disabling injuries to their employees. A factor that contributes to this situation is the lack of tools for evaluating patient handling systems including workplace culture and climate. This observational study analyzes the responses of 38 nurses from two similar units that use different patient handling systems to test the reliability and validity of the Safe Patient Handling Survey (TM) SPH Survey(TM), a perception survey and improvement tool for employees and employers. The survey contains 55 questions divided into 6 clusters, staff and patient injury and violence questions, and picture questions depicting unsafe techniques. The data were analyzed to see how the SPH Survey(TM) scores correlate with incidents, and its ability to detect differences between the two units. The results of the Pearson and Cronbach(TM) alpha tests show strong reliability, validity and consistency of the SPH Survey(TM). ANOVA comparison of means and Spearman(TM) rho tests shows that higher (better) scores on the SPH Survey(TM) clusters correlate with lower numbers of patient injuries, lower reports of verbal and physical violence episodes, and lower staff injuries. Differences were detected between the units with Unit 2 scoring higher than Unit 1 in all SPH Survey(TM) clusters and scoring lower in staff and patient injuries and violence incidents. Although the analysis was limited by the small sample size, the study has created a sound basis for further investigation. Health care organizations, unions, government bodies, insurers, educational institutions, and researchers must continue to reduce patient handling risk for both health care workers and for patients. The SPH Survey(TM) is shown to be an easy way to reliably evaluate patient handling systems and workplace culture, target improvement initiatives, and continually monitor the level of patient handling risk in the workplace. Low-risk patient handling gives health care providers the means to focus on delivering high quality patient care, without endangering their own health and well-being.</p>

Influence of Work-Related Safety and Health Guidelines on Knowledge and Prevalence of Occupational Back Pain among Rehabilitation Nurses in Saudi Arabia: A 6-Month Follow-Up Study

Background: Nurses are frequently involved in different types of patient handling activities in different departments of the hospitals. Mishandling the patients causes accumulative stress on their spine that results in occupational back pain (OBP), substantial morbidity, and incurred cost. Objectives: This study aimed to observe the influence of work-related safety and health guidelines on knowledge and prevalence of occupational back pain among rehabilitation nurses in Saudi Arabia. Methodology: This cohort study was conducted with the inclusion of a total of 116-registered rehabilitation nurses (97-female, 19-male, mean age = 39.6-years) from different regions of Saudi Arabia. After the invitation, these nurses attended an ergonomic workshop focusing on work-related safety and patient handling guidelines, risk assessment, and control of OBP. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess the knowledge, risk, and prevalence of OBP at baseline and 6-months follow-up. Results: The perceived knowledge score significantly improved (95% CI; t = 4.691; p < 0.001; Cohen’s d = 0.72) at 6-month follow-up (mean ± SD = 81.6 ± 18.2) from its baseline score (mean ± SD = 68.2 ± 19.2). Likewise, the prevalence score of OBP markedly reduced from 71.5% (baseline) to 65.0% (6-month follow-up). Conclusion: The level of knowledge highly improved and the prevalence of OBP markedly reduced within a span of 6-month among rehabilitation nurses in Saudi Arabia after attending an ergonomic workshop. Importantly, the nurses learned and geared up themselves for practicing the safe patient handling guidelines to avoid occupational back pain in the future. Therefore, rehabilitation nurses should update their knowledge and awareness about occupational safety and health guidelines, risk assessments, and control of OBP at a regular interval for increasing the knowledge and reducing the prevalence of OBP among them.