No abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of commercially available friction-reducing patient-transfer devices in reducing biomechanical stresses on caregivers and patients. Background: Caregivers suffer from high prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, which is associated with manual patient handling. However, there is not enough information available on the efficacy of various friction-reducing devices in reducing biomechanical stresses in the upper extremities and low back. Method: During patient-transfer tasks performed by 20 caregivers, we measured hand force; shoulder and trunk posture; shoulder moment; muscle activity in the flexor digitorum superficialis, extensor digitorum communis, biceps, triceps, trapezius, and erector spinae; and usability ratings from four devices: a draw sheet, a repositioning sheet, a slide board, and an air-assisted device. In addition, triaxial head acceleration of mock patients was measured to evaluate patients’ head acceleration. Results: The slide board and air-assisted device significantly reduced hand force ( p < .001), shoulder flexion ( p < .001), shoulder moment ( p < .001), muscle activities of caregivers ( p < .004), and patients’ head acceleration ( p < .023) compared with the draw sheet. However, no significant differences in biomechanical measures were found between the repositioning and draw sheets. The air-assisted device consistently showed the lowest biomechanical stresses and was most preferred by participants. Conclusion: Reduction in caregivers’ biomechanical stresses and mock patients’ head acceleration indicates that a slide board and an air-assisted device can be effective engineering controls to reduce risk of injury. Application: The study results can provide a recommendation for engineering controls to reduce biomechanical stresses for both caregivers and patients.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of different workstations on prefrontal brain activity and cognitive performance during standardized neurocognitive tasks.Methods: With a repeated-measures laboratory study, 20 university students (24.5 ± 3.0 years old; 10 females) were exposed to either a conventional sitting workstation or leaning workstation. After a one-hour exposure to the workstation, participants performed five different neurocognitive tasks which assessed the executive function and working memory.Results: The oxygenation levels in the prefrontal cortex were significantly different between the two workstations (p's < 0.042). However, there was no significant difference in cognitive performance (speed and accuracy) between the two workstations (p's > 0.064). Given higher oxygenation concentration in the prefrontal cortex, the leaning workstation might have improved the capacity of executive function and working memory when compared to the sitting workstation. Conclusions:The findings suggest that leaning workstation may improve the cognitive function when compared to sitting workstation by increasing the prefrontal cortex activity associated with the executive function and working memory. This study exposed the potential neurocognitive benefits of the leaning workstation.

This study systematically investigated the efficacy of commercially-available patient transfer devices (a slide sheet, slide board, air-assisted device, and conventional draw sheet) in reducing biomechanical exposures during standardized lateral patient transfer tasks. A repeated-measures laboratory study with 10 experienced caregivers (9 females and 1 male) was conducted to measure the muscle activity in the upper extremity (flexor digitorum superficialis, extensor digitorum communis, biceps, triceps, and trapezius) and low back (erector spinae), and hand pull force and during standardized lateral patient transfer tasks with four different commercially-available transfer devices. The results showed that there were significant differences between the transfer devices in muscle activity (p’s < 0.01) and hand pull force (p < 0.01). The air-assisted device showed the largest reduction of muscle activities and hand pull force. The slide board also showed lower muscle activities and hand full force as compared to the slide sheet and conventional draw sheet; however, limited differences in muscle activity and hand pull force were found between the slide sheet and conventional draw sheet. These findings indicate that the air-assisted device and slide board may be effective engineering controls to reduce the biomechanical exposures and associated injury risks in the upper extremity and low back among caregivers.