A. Yassi et al., A randomized controlled trial to prevent patient lift and transfer injuries of health care workers, SPINE, 26(16), 2001, pp. 1739-1746
Study Design. Randomized controlled trial (RCT).
Objectives. To compare the effectiveness of training and equipment to reduc
e musculoskeletal injuries, increase comfort, and reduce physical demands o
n staff performing patient lifts and transfers at a large acute care hospit
al.
Summary of Background Data. Back injury to nursing staff during patient han
dling tasks is a major issue in health care. The value of mechanical assist
ive devices in reducing injuries to these workers is unclear.
Methods. This three-armed RCT consisted of a "control arm," a "safe lifting
" arm, and a "no strenuous lifting" arm. A medical, surgical, and rehabilit
ation ward were each randomly assigned to each arm. Both intervention arms
received intensive training in back care, patient assessment, and handling
techniques. Hence, the "safe lifting" arm used improved patient handling te
chniques using manual equipment, whereas the "no strenuous lifting" arm aim
ed to eliminate manual patient handling through use of additional mechanica
l and other assistive equipment.
Results. Frequency of manual patient handling tasks was significantly decre
ased on the "no strenuous lifting" arm. Self-perceived work fatigue, back a
nd shoulder pain, safety, and frequency and intensity of physical discomfor
t associated with patient handling tasks were improved on both intervention
arms, but staff on the mechanical equipment arm showed greater improvement
s. Musculoskeletal injury rates were not significantly altered.
Conclusions, The "no strenuous lifting" program, which combined training wi
th assured availability of mechanical and other assistive patient handling
equipment, most effectively improved comfort with patient handling, decreas
ed staff fatigue, and decreased physical demands. The fact that injury rate
s were not statistically significantly reduced may reflect the less sensiti
ve nature of this indicator compared with the subjective indicators.