4.4 Article

Evaluation of training in patient handling and moving skills among hospital and home care personnel

期刊

ERGONOMICS
卷 45, 期 12, 页码 850-865

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00140130210160920

关键词

evaluation; musculoskeletal problems; nursing; nursing personnel; patient handling; work technique

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the study was to evaluate the training programme in patient handling and moving skills according to the Stockholm Training Concept. The evaluation focused on work technique, musculoskeletal problems, job strain and the experience of the person being transferred. The training programme consisted of two models of learning: traditional groups and quality circles. Fifty-one people employed at geriatric hospitals and in primary care, participated in the training programme. For the evaluation, the participants were video-recorded in one standardized transfer situation: moving the patient from bed to wheelchair, before and after the training. The participants' work technique during the patient transfer was assessed using seven items. A questionnaire covering individual factors, physical exertion, job strain, and musculoskeletal problems, was filled in by the participants before training and also six months after. The results showed improvements in six of the seven work technique items, directly after training. A decrease in the participants' physical exertion during transfers of patients from 'bed to chair' was shown six months after completion of the training programme. There was no significant decrease in the participants' musculoskeletal problems and job strain after training. Ninety-eight per cent of the participants were positive about having participated in the training. Training in patient handling and moving skills led to improved work technique. The participants improved their transfer technique and experienced less discomfort during the transfer, and patients experienced greater comfort and safety when being transferred.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据