4.5 Article

Musculoskeletal occupational injury among surgeons: effects for patients, providers, and institutions

Journal

JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 189, Issue 2, Pages 207-+

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2014.03.013

Keywords

Workplace injury; Occupational health; Surgeon injury

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of this study was to determine the risk of occupational musculoskeletal injury during a surgeon's career and the effects of these injuries for patients, providers, and institutions. We hypothesized that surgeons have occupational injuries, which affect work performance. Materials and methods: Electronic RedCAP surveys on workplace injury were distributed statewide via e-mail to the members of the Tennessee chapter of the American College of Surgeons. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze survey data. Results: A total of 260 of 793 surveys (33%) were returned. Forty percent of surgeons sustained >= 1 injuries in the workplace. Although 50% of injured surgeons received medical care for their most recent injuries, only 20% of these injuries were reported to their institution. Twenty-two percent of injured surgeons missed work and 35% performed fewer operations while they were recovering from their injury. Fifty-three percent of injured surgeons reported that pain from their injury had a minimal or moderate effect on their performance in the operating room. Conclusions: Surgeons appear to be at moderate risk for occupation-related injuries. The low rate of institutional reporting for these injuries is concerning, as this is a required step to access institutional support once injured. Surgeon injury results in lost productivity due to missed workdays and may impact the quality of surgical care because of performance issues while recovering from injury. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available