| Title |
Does the use of small aids during patient handling activities lead to a decreased occurrence of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases? A systematic review
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00420-015-1094-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. Freiberg, U. Euler, M. Girbig, A. Nienhaus, S. Freitag, A. Seidler |
| Abstract |
Patient handling increases the risk of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases among healthcare workers. Thus, the use of small aids for patient handling is recommended. Small aids are non-electrical and handy assistive devices that support caregivers during patient handling. To date, there is no evidence about the clinical efficacy of small aids. Hence, the objective of this systematic review was to systematically analyze whether the use of small aids during patient handling leads to a decreased occurrence of musculoskeletal disorders. A systematic literature search was carried out. The review process was done independently by two reviewers. Methodology was assessed with the "Downs and Black checklist" and the "Risk of Bias tool." Quality of evidence was determined with the GRADE method. One randomized and two non-randomized trials were included. Three comparisons of intervention assessing the lumbar spine and shoulder joint were investigated. A statistically significant improvement of the 7-day prevalence of low back pain and shoulder pain was achieved within the intervention group over time of questionable clinical importance in a study with comparisons made between small aids and usual practice or mechanical aids. No comparison between the intervention group and control group at follow-up was made. Each trial showed an insufficient methodology and a high risk of bias. Quality of evidence was low for disability scores and very low for pain outcomes. To date, there is no convincing evidence (from low-quality studies) for the preventability of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases by the use of small aids. The literature also lacks evidence for the opposite. Generalizability of the study results is further debatable due to the different populations and settings that were investigated. Robust, high-quality intervention studies are necessary to clarify the clinical efficacy of small aids in healthcare work. CRD42014009767. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 77 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 9% |
| Librarian | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 22 | 28% |
| Unknown | 21 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 18 | 23% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 15 | 19% |
| Engineering | 5 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 29 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#16,049,105
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
#1,721
of 1,988 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,282
of 280,903 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,988 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,903 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.