A Sensibility Assessment of the Job Demands and Accommodation Planning Tool (JDAPT): A Tool to Help Workers with an Episodic Disability Plan Workplace Support.

Purpose Sensibility refers to a tool's comprehensiveness, understandability, relevance, feasibility, and length. It is used in the early development phase to begin assessing a new tool or intervention. This study examined the sensibility of the job demands and accommodation planning tool (JDAPT). The JDAPT identifies job demands related to physical, cognitive, interpersonal, and working conditions to better target strategies for workplace supports and accommodations aimed at assisting individuals with chronic health conditions. Methods Workers with a chronic health condition and workplace representatives were recruited from health charities, workplaces, and newsletters using convenience sampling. Cognitive interviews assessed the JDAPT's sensibility. A 70% endorsement rate was the minimum level of acceptability for sensibility concepts. A short screening tool also was administered, and answers compared to the complete JDAPT. Results Participants were 46 workers and 23 organizational representatives (n = 69). Endorsements highly exceeded the 70% cut-off for understandability, relevance, and length. Congruence between screening questions and the complete JDAPT suggested both workers and organizational representatives overlooked job demands when completing the screener. Participants provided additional examples and three new items to improve comprehensiveness. The JDAPT was rated highly relevant and useful, although not always easy to complete for someone with an episodic condition. Conclusions This study highlights the need for tools that facilitate accommodations for workers with episodic disabilities and provides early evidence for the sensibility of the JDAPT.

Integrating Safety and Health Promotion in Workplaces: A Scoping Review of Facilitators, Barriers, and Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Growing evidence supports the integration and coordination of occupational health and safety and workplace health promotion activities instead of these coexisting as siloed efforts. Identifying implementation challenges and how these can be overcome is an important step to achieving truly integrated worker health efforts. We conducted a scoping review to identify the barriers and facilitators to integrated worker health approaches and described recommendations for implementing these efforts. METHOD: Peer-reviewed articles and gray literature from 2008 to 2019 were searched from the following electronic databases: EMBASE, Ovid Medline, PsycINFO, and ABI/INFORM. References from relevant articles and key informant suggestions also were collected. Data were extracted from documents if they focused on the occupational health and safety and health promotion of workers and described outcomes associated with integrated worker health approaches or outlined considerations relevant to the implementation of these approaches. RESULTS: Fifty-one documents met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Barriers and facilitators to implementing integrated worker health approaches were found at the extraorganizational, organizational, worker, and program levels, with limited resource availability the most reported barrier and support from leadership the most reported facilitator. Ten broad recommendations were identified and highlighted gaining leadership support, demonstrating leadership commitment, developing worker-centric approaches, and building capacity for workers. CONCLUSION: In reviewing the literature, we found clear and consistent recommendations relevant for integrated worker health approaches. Further research is needed to better understand how these recommendations apply to diverse workforces and organizations with varied resources.

A research impact model for work and health.

Research organizations, governments and funding agencies are increasingly interested in the impact of research beyond academia. While a growing literature describes research impacts in healthcare and health services, little has focused on occupational health and safety research. This article describes a research impact model that has been in use for over a decade. The model was developed to track and describe the impact of research conducted by a mid-sized institute that focuses on work and health. Model development was informed by existing models, with the goal of contextualizing the institute's case studies describing three types of research impact: evidence of the diffusion of research; evidence of research informing decision-making; and evidence of societal impact. A logic model describes research actions and outcomes, as well as key audiences and knowledge transfer approaches. A unique element is its indication of the level of difficulty in determining types of impact. The model compares well with current research impact models developed or used in healthcare and health services research, and it has been useful in guiding a mid-sized research organization's process for tracking and describing the impact of its research. It may be useful to other small and mid-sized research organizations that focus on workplace health and safety.

Disclosure, Privacy and Workplace Accommodation of Episodic Disabilities: Organizational Perspectives on Disability Communication-Support Processes to Sustain Employment.

Purpose Employers increasingly are asked to accommodate workers living with physical and mental health conditions that cause episodic disability, where periods of wellness are punctuated by intermittent and often unpredictable activity limitations (e.g., depression, anxiety, arthritis, colitis). Episodic disabilities may be challenging for workplaces which must comply with legislation protecting the privacy of health information while believing they would benefit from personal health details to meet a worker's accommodation needs. This research aimed to understand organizational perspectives on disability communication-support processes. Methods Twenty-seven participants from diverse employment sectors and who had responsibilities for supporting workers living with episodic disabilities (e.g., supervisors, disability managers, union representatives, occupational health representatives, labour lawyers) were interviewed. Five participants also had lived experience of a physical or mental health episodic disability. Participants were recruited through organizational associations, community networks and advertising. Semi-structured interviews and qualitative content analysis framed data collection and analyses, and mapped communication-support processes. Results Seven themes underpinned communication-support process: (1) similarities and differences among physical and mental health episodic disabilities; (2) cultures of workplace support, including contrasting medical and biopsychosocial perspectives; (3) misgivings about others and their role in communication-support processes; (4) that subjective perceptions matter; (5) the inherent complexity of the response process; (6) challenges arising when a worker denies a disability; and (7) casting disability as a performance problem. Conclusions This study identifies a conceptual framework and areas where workplace disability support processes could be enhanced to improve inclusion and the sustainability of employment among workers living with episodic disabilities.

A mixed methods examination of knowledge brokers and their use of theoretical frameworks and evaluative practices.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation approach that includes making connections between researchers and decision-makers to facilitate the latter's use of evidence in health promotion and the provision of healthcare. Despite knowledge brokering being well-established in Canada, many knowledge gaps exist, including understanding what theoretical frameworks have been developed and which evaluative practices knowledge brokers (KBs) use. METHODS: This study used a mixed methods design to examine how KBs in Canada (1) use frameworks, models and theories in their practice and (2) how they evaluate knowledge brokering interventions. We gathered interview and survey data from KB practitioners to better understand their perspectives on effective practices. Our analysis focused on understanding the theoretical frameworks used by KBs. RESULTS: This study demonstrates that KBs in Canada tend not to rely on theories or models that are specific to knowledge brokering. Rather, study participants/respondents draw on (sometimes multiple) theories and models that are fundamental to the broader field of knowledge translation - in particular, the Knowledge to Action model and the Promoting Action Research in Health Sciences framework. In evaluating the impact of their own knowledge brokering practice, participants/respondents use a wide variety of mechanisms. Evaluation was often seen as less important than supporting knowledge users and/or paying clients in accessing and utilising evidence. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge brokering as a form of knowledge translation continues to expand, but the impact on its targeted knowledge users has yet to be clearly established. The quality of engagement between KBs and their clients might increase - the knowledge brokering can be more impactful - if KBs made efforts to describe, understand and evaluate their activities using theories or models specific to KB.

Multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation for subacute low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Low back pain (LBP) is associated with enormous personal and societal burdens, especially when it reaches the chronic stage of the disorder (pain for a duration of more than three months). Indeed, individuals who reach the chronic stage tend to show a more persistent course, and they account for the majority of social and economic costs. As a result, there is increasing emphasis on the importance of intervening at the early stages of LBP.According to the biopsychosocial model, LBP is a condition best understood with reference to an interaction of physical, psychological, and social influences. This has led to the development of multidisciplinary biopsychosocial rehabilitation (MBR) programs that target factors from the different domains, administered by healthcare professionals from different backgrounds.This review is an update of a Cochrane Review on MBR for subacute LBP, which was published in 2003. It is part of a series of reviews on MBR for musculoskeletal pain published by the Cochrane Back and Neck Group and the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Group. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of MBR for subacute LBP (pain for a duration of six to 12 weeks) among adults, with a focus on pain, back-specific disability, and work status. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for relevant trials in any language by a computer-aided search of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and two trials registers. Our search is current to 13 July 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with subacute LBP. We included studies that investigated a MBR program compared to any type of control intervention. We defined MBR as an intervention that included a physical component (e.g. pharmacological, physical therapy) in combination with either a psychological, social, or occupational component (or any combination of these). We also required involvement of healthcare professionals from at least two different clinical backgrounds with appropriate training to deliver the component for which they were responsible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. In particular, the data extraction and 'risk of bias' assessment were conducted by two people, independently. We used the Cochrane tool to assess risk of bias and the GRADE approach to assess the overall quality of the evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of nine RCTs (981 participants) in this review. Five studies were conducted in Europe and four in North America. Sample sizes ranged from 33 to 351. The mean age across trials ranged between 32.0 and 43.7 years.All included studies were judged as having high risk of performance bias and high risk of detection bias due to lack of blinding, and four of the nine studies suffered from at least one additional source of possible bias.In MBR compared to usual care for subacute LBP, individuals receiving MBR had less pain (four studies with 336 participants; SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.21, moderate-quality of evidence due to risk of bias) and less disability (three studies with 240 participants; SMD -0.44, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.01, low-quality of evidence due to risk of bias and inconsistency), as well as increased likelihood of return-to-work (three studies with 170 participants; OR 3.19, 95% CI 1.46 to 6.98, very low-quality of evidence due to serious risk of bias and imprecision) and fewer sick leave days (two studies with 210 participants; SMD -0.38 95% CI -0.66 to -0.10, low-quality of evidence due to risk of bias and imprecision) at 12-month follow-up. The effect sizes for pain and disability were low in terms of clinical meaningfulness, whereas effects for work-related outcomes were in the moderate range.However, when comparing MBR to other treatments (i.e. brief intervention with features from a light mobilization program and a graded activity program, functional restoration, brief clinical intervention including education and advice on exercise, and psychological counselling), we found no differences between the groups in terms of pain (two studies with 336 participants; SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.07, low-quality evidence due to imprecision and risk of bias), functional disability (two studies with 345 participants; SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.18, low-quality evidence due to imprecision and risk of bias), and time away from work (two studies with 158 participants; SMD -0.25 95% CI -0.98 to 0.47, very low-quality evidence due to serious imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias). Return-to-work was not reported in any of the studies.Although we looked for adverse events in both comparisons, none of the included studies reported this outcome. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: On average, people with subacute LBP who receive MBR will do better than if they receive usual care, but it is not clear whether they do better than people who receive some other type of treatment. However, the available research provides mainly low to very low-quality evidence, thus additional high-quality trials are needed before we can describe the value of MBP for clinical practice.

Systematic Review of Prognostic Factors for Return to Work in Workers with Sub Acute and Chronic Low Back Pain.

Purpose We systematically reviewed the evidence on factors that predict duration of sick leave in workers after 6 weeks low back pain (LBP) related sick leave. We hypothesized that different factors affect the duration of the leave depending on the time away from work. Methods The review occurred in seven phases: (1) developing the central question, (2) conducting the literature search, (3) identifying relevant publications, (4) quality appraisal, (5) data extraction, (6) evidence synthesis, and (7) knowledge translation. We searched for studies that reported episodes of LBP and sick leave that lasted more than 6 weeks. All included studies reported at least one prognostic factor where return to work was the outcome. Results We identified twenty-two relevant publications. The impact of pain, functional status and radiating pain seems to change with duration of work disability. Workers' recovery expectations remain important after 6 weeks. Modified duties are rarely studied in later phases of work disability. Depression/mental health did not appear to be an important factor in later phases. Workplace physical factors remain important. There is insufficient evidence that pain catastrophising and fear avoidance are predictive factors in later phases. There was moderate evidence for age in the later phases. Functional capacity and claim related factors were supported by some evidence. Discusion Physical demands in the workplace are preventing workers from getting back to work in a timely fashion across phases. The psychosocial work environment is understudied in later phases. Overall, we cannot conclude that prognostic factors change over time.

Dissemination and use of a participatory ergonomics guide for workplaces.

Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) result in lost-time injury claims and lost productivity worldwide, placing a substantial burden on workers and workplaces. Participatory ergonomics (PE) is a popular approach to reducing MSDs; however, there are challenges to implementing PE programmes. Using evidence to overcome challenges may be helpful but the impacts of doing so are unknown. We sought to disseminate an evidence-based PE tool and to describe its use. An easy-to-use, evidence-based PE Guide was disseminated to workplace parties, who were surveyed about using the tool. The greatest barrier to using the tool was a lack of time. Reported tool use included for training purposes, sharing and integrating the tool into existing programmes. New actions related to tool use included training, defining team responsibilities and suggesting programme implementation steps. Evidence-based tools could help ergonomists overcome some challenges involved in implementing injury reduction programmes such as PE. Practitioner Summary Practitioners experience challenges implementing programmes to reduce the burden of MSDs in workplaces. Implementing participatory interventions requires multiple workplace parties to be 'on-board'. Disseminating and using evidence-based guides may help to overcome these challenges. Using evidence-based tools may help ergonomics practitioners implement PE programmes.

Trainees' Self-Reported Challenges in Knowledge Translation, Research and Practice.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge translation (KT) refers to the process of moving evidence into healthcare policy and practice. Understanding the experiences and perspectives of individuals who develop careers in KT is important for designing training programs and opportunities to enhance capacity in KT research and practice. To date, however, limited research has explored the challenges that trainees encounter as they develop their careers in KT. AIMS: The purpose of this study is to identify the challenges that KT trainees face in their KT research or practice. METHODS: An online survey was conducted with a sample of trainees associated with the Knowledge Translation Trainee Collaborative or the KT Canada Summer Institutes, with written responses thematically analyzed. FINDINGS: A total of 35 individual responses were analyzed, resulting in the identification of six interrelated themes, listed in descending order of prevalence: limited availability of KT-specific resources (54%), difficulty inherent in investigating KT (34%), KT not recognized as a distinct field (23%), colleagues' limited knowledge and understanding of KT (20%), competing priorities and limited time (20%), and difficulties in relation to collaboration (14%). DISCUSSION: KT trainees experience specific challenges in their work: limited understanding of KT in other stakeholder groups; limited structures or infrastructure to support those who do KT; the inherently interdisciplinary and applied nature of KT; and the resultant complexities of scientific inquiry in this field, such as designing and testing multifaceted, multilevel implementation strategies and accounting for contextual factors. LINKING EVIDENCE TO ACTION: KT training and capacity-building efforts are needed to better position health systems to routinely adopt knowledge into healthcare policy and practice.

Measurement properties of the QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the QuickDASH: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To identify and synthesize evidence for the measurement properties of the QuickDASH, a shortened version of the 30-item DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) instrument. METHODS: This systematic review used a best evidence synthesis approach to critically appraise the measurement properties [using COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN)] of the QuickDASH and cross-cultural adaptations. A standard search strategy was conducted between 2005 (year of first publication of QuickDASH) and March 2011 in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL. RESULTS: The search identified 14 studies to include in the best evidence synthesis of the QuickDASH. A further 11 studies were identified on eight cross-cultural adaptation versions. CONCLUSIONS: Many measurement properties of the QuickDASH have been evaluated in multiple studies and across most of the measurement properties. The best evidence synthesis of the QuickDASH English version suggests that this tool is performing well with strong positive evidence for reliability and validity (hypothesis testing), and moderate positive evidence for structural validity testing. Strong negative evidence was found for responsiveness due to lower correlations with global estimates of change. Information about the measurement properties of the cross-cultural adaptation versions is still lacking, or the available information is of poor overall methodological quality.

The association between workers' compensation claims involving neck pain and future health care utilization: a population-based cohort study.

PURPOSE: To describe the health care utilization of injured workers who made a workers' compensation claim for neck pain. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of injured workers who made an incident claim involving neck pain to the Ontario Workplace Safety and Insurance Board between 1997 and 1998. We linked their workers' compensation and Ontario Health Insurance Plan files to collect all health care services accrued during the year prior to and 2 years after the claim was initiated. We report the 7 day simple moving average of health care services per 1,000 claimants per day. We stratified our analysis by age, sex, the pre-claim level of health care utilization, diagnostic category and health care specialty. RESULTS: 58.1 % of claimants were males and 35.1 % were between the ages of 35 and 44 years. The cumulative rate of health care utilization was stable (mean = 60.80 services/1,000 claimants/day; 95 % CI: 59.7-62.0) throughout the year prior to the claim. However, it peaked during the first 4 days following the onset of the claim (mean = 473.3 services/1,000 claimants/day) and remained on average 311 % higher than baseline during the first month post-claim. On average in our sample, the health care utilization remained 11 % higher in the second year after the claim compared to the pre-claim level. This sustained increase was attributable to 6 % of claimants. CONCLUSIONS: We report a long-term increase in the average number of health care services utilized by injured workers who make a workers' compensation claim involving neck pain. This increase was attributable to a minority of claimants. The health reasons for this increase deserve further investigation.

A pilot randomised control trial of the effectiveness of a biofeedback mouse in reducing self-reported pain among office workers.

A pilot study examined the effectiveness of a biofeedback mouse in reducing upper extremity pain and discomfort in office workers; in addition, relative mouse use (RMU), satisfaction and the feasibility of running a randomised controlled trial (RCT) in a workplace setting were evaluated. The mouse would gently vibrate if the hand was idle for more than 12 s. The feedback reminded users to rest the arm in neutral, supported postures. Analysis showed a statistically significant reduction in shoulder pain and discomfort for the intervention group at T2 (38.7% lower than controls). Statistically significant differences in RMU time between groups were seen post intervention (-7% at T1 and +15% at T2 for the intervention group). Fifty-five percent of the intervention group was willing to continue using the mouse. It appears feasible to perform an RCT for this type of intervention in a workplace setting. Further study including more participants is suggested. PRACTITIONER SUMMARY: The study findings support the feasibility of conducting randomised control trials in office settings to evaluate ergonomics interventions. The intervention resulted in reduced pain and discomfort in the shoulder. The intervention could be a relevant tool in the reduction of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder. Further research will better explain the study's preliminary findings.

A randomised controlled study to evaluate the effectiveness of targeted occupational health and safety consultation or inspection in Ontario manufacturing workplaces.

OBJECTIVE: From 2004 to 2008, the prevention system in Ontario, Canada ran the High Risk Firm Initiative, an injury-experience based targeted consultation or inspection programme. Our objective was to establish whether prevention system targeting of firms was effective in improving injury outcomes. METHODS: Randomised controlled parallel groups. Population included all manufacturing firms registered with the Ontario Workplace Safety & Insurance Board in 2005. Firms ranked between the 2nd and 10th percentile on a composite measure of occupational health and safety performance were randomised to three study arms in 2006: targeted for Health & Safety Association (HSA) consultation, targeted for Ministry of Labour (MOL) inspection, or services as usual. Data included firm characteristics (sector, size, years in business, region, branches), work injury claims 2002-2008 and measures of consulting and inspecting activity. Negative binomial generalised estimating equations modelled claim and disability day rates by study arm and year, controlling for firm characteristics. RESULTS: Among 2153 firms, firm characteristics and 2002-2005 rates of work injury claims and disability days were similar across arms. Firm outcomes were significantly different from year to year, but study arm by year interactions were insignificant indicating similar trends for all three study arms. 83% of HSA targeted firms were contacted and 63% engaged while 75% of MOL targeted firms were inspected with orders written in 56%. CONCLUSIONS: Consultation and enforcement programmes as implemented were not sufficient to reduce work injury outcomes over 21 month follow-up. Lack of benefit could be due to non-specific firm selection methods, limited firm participation in interventions, low intervention intensity or insensitivity of available outcomes.

Musculoskeletal disorder risk assessment tool use: A Canadian perspective.

Canadian ergonomics professionals from the Association of Canadian Ergonomists (ACE) and Board of Canadian Registered Safety Professionals (BCRSP) participated in a web-based survey of their awareness, use, and factors influencing use of ergonomics musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) risk assessment tools. A total of 791 respondents (21.0% response rate) participated in the survey. Certified ergonomics professionals represented an important subpopulation of MSD risk assessment tool users, however; the vast majority (86.4%) of users within Canada were certified safety professionals. Average tool use varied between ACE and BCRSP groups, where ACE respondents on average use more tools than BCRSP respondents, however the top 10 tools used were similar between the groups. Over 45% of assessment tools were learned at school and average tool use was not influenced by years of experience or continuing education.

Workplace Musculoskeletal Disorder Prevention Practices and Experiences.

Introduction. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) remain a substantial burden to society and to workplaces worldwide. Evidence-based practice approaches may be helpful; however, current research evidence is not consistently strong. Workplaces must address MSD regardless of the state of the research evidence. The study objective was to describe workplace MSD prevention practices experiences and perspectives of workers, managers, and occupational health and safety practitioners. Methods. This descriptive study used a convenience sample from Newfoundland and Labrador workplaces. Data were collected via survey and interviews. The survey data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and the interview data was analyzed using thematic analysis. Results. Results were examined from 645 survey respondents and 17 interviewees. Survey findings revealed that about half of respondents reported MSD policies existed in their workplace. Many MSD practices (such as ergonomics and force reduction) were considered available by most respondents. Over fifty percent of respondents received some training on MSD. The person most often endorsed as responsible to support workers with MSD was a manager. Interview findings showed that MSD prevention practices related to awareness, training, and hazard reduction are considered important and effective. Facilitators of MSD prevention include practices that are proactive and customized and increase knowledge about MSD prevention. Barriers concerning lack of resources and poor implementation were consistently mentioned. Conclusions. Evidence from current practices may help workplaces reduce MSD burden. However, with only about fifty percent of respondents reporting that MSD policies exist in the workplace, further work to address MSD is required. Future research should examine workplace practices as an important source of evidence. OHS professionals can use the study findings and adapt it to their context(s) to guide their design and implementation of MSD prevention practices. Improved MSD prevention practices and interventions can lead to decreases in MSD in workplaces across all industrial sectors.

Inclusion of young people with disabilities in the future of work: forecasting workplace, labour market and community-based strategies through an online and accessible Delphi survey protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The future of work is expected to transform the nature of work, create unique employment barriers for young people living with disabilities and disrupt pathways to better health. We present a Delphi survey protocol through which we aim to obtain future-oriented strategies that can improve the accessibility and inclusion of young people with disabilities in the future of work. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Delphi survey will be conducted primarily online, over two rounds and in a format that is accessible to people living with disabilities. A diverse sample of subject matter experts (eg, policy makers, employment service providers, labour market experts) and participants with lived experience of a disability will be recruited using a purposive sampling strategy. All participants will be asked to complete both rounds of the Delphi survey. In the first round, open-ended questions will be asked about workplace, community-based or policy supports that can foster the inclusion of young people with disabilities in the labour market and that can also address specific future of work trends which span sociopolitical, economic, environmental and technological domains. In the second round of the survey, we will aim to build consensus; participants will be provided with a summary of specific strategies that correspond to the different future of work trends emerging from round one and will be asked to rank-order strategies according to their importance. Following the completion of the second round, consensus-based and future-focused recommendations will be generated that can support young people with disabilities in the world of work over the coming decades. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol has been cleared by the University of Toronto's research ethics board (#40727). The study will identify future-focused support strategies that will be shared with people living with disabilities, policy makers and disability employment service providers through an integrated knowledge transfer and exchange approach.

Organizational Perspectives on How to Successfully Integrate Health Promotion Activities into Occupational Health and Safety.

OBJECTIVE: There is increasing recognition of the value of integrating efforts to promote worker health with existing occupational health and safety activities. This paper aimed to identify facilitators, barriers and recommendations for implementing integrated worker health approaches. METHODS: Thirteen stakeholders from different job sectors participated in a workshop that targeted key issues underlying integrated worker health approaches in their own and other organizations. Included were participants from human resources, occupational health and safety, government, and unions. Thematic analysis and an online ranking exercise identified recommendation priorities and contributed to a conceptual framework. RESULTS: Participants highlighted the importance of planning phases in addition to implementation and evaluation. Themes highlighted organizational priorities, leadership buy-in, external pressures, training, program promotion and evaluation metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide practical directions for integrating worker health promotion and safety and implementation steps.

Implementation of participatory organizational change in long term care to improve safety.

INTRODUCTION: Long Term Care (LTC) facilities are fast-paced, demanding environments placing workers at significant risk for injuries. Health and safety interventions to address hazards in LTC are challenging to implement. The study assessed a participatory organizational change intervention implementation and impacts. METHODS: This was a mixed methods implementation study with a concurrent control, conducted from 2017 to 2019 in four non-profit LTC facilities in Ontario, Canada. Study participants were managers and frontline staff. Intervention sites implemented a participatory organizational change program, control sites distributed one-page health and safety pamphlets. Program impact data were collected via Survey (self-efficacy, control over work, pain and general health) and observation (Quick Exposure Checklist). Interviews/focus groups were used to collect program implementation data. RESULTS: Participants described program impacts (hazard controls through equipment purchase/modification, practice changes, and education/training) and positive changes in culture, communication and collaboration. There was a statistically significant difference in manager self-efficacy for musculoskeletal disorder (MSD) hazards between the control and intervention sites over time but no other statistical differences were found. Key program implementation challenges included LTC hazards, staff shortage/turnover, safety culture, staff time to participate, and communication. Facilitators included frontline staff involvement during implementation, management support, focusing on a single unit, training, and involving an external program facilitator. CONCLUSION: A participatory program can have positive impacts on identifying and reducing MSD hazards. Key to success is involving frontline staff in identifying hazards and creating solutions and management encouragement on a unit working together. High turnover rates, staffing shortages, and time constraints were barriers as they are for all organizational change efforts in LTC. The implementation findings are likely applicable in any jurisdiction. Practical Application: Implementing a participatory organizational change program to reduce MSD hazards is feasible in LTC and can improve communication and aid in identification and control of hazards.

Engaging Occupational Safety and Health Professionals in Bridging Research and Practice: Evaluation of a Participatory Workshop Program in the Danish Construction Industry.

Engaging occupational safety and health (OSH) professionals has scarcely been evaluated as a means for transferring knowledge to practice about physical workload in the construction industry. The aim of this work was to examine how participants used and incorporate research-based knowledge from a three-day training course into practice. Twenty OSH professionals from the Danish construction industry participated in a workshop-training course. Researchers presented new knowledge and results about physically demanding work. The participants selected which themes they wanted to work with and developed an action plan. Evaluation was done using surveys and phone interviews. Analysis was based on how the OSH-professionals describe themselves, organizations, and the construction industry. Participant's average scores on the level of implementation of their chosen action plans were 3 (on a response scale from 1-5, where 1 is 'to a very low degree' and 5 is 'to a very high degree') immediately after the workshop program and 2.5 at follow-up. Qualitative evaluations showed that actions had been initiated, and some progress had been made. The participants were satisfied with the workshop course and the possibility to increase their knowledge through inputs from researchers and colleges and strongly believe that they would succeed with implementing their action plans in the future.

Systematic review of the role of occupational health and safety interventions in the prevention of upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms, signs, disorders, injuries, claims and lost time.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the most effective occupational health and safety (OHS) interventions to reduce upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and injuries. METHODS: A systematic review used a best evidence synthesis approach to address the question: "do occupational health and safety interventions have an effect on upper extremity musculoskeletal symptoms, signs, disorders, injuries, claims and lost time?" RESULTS: The search identified 36 studies of sufficient methodological quality to be included in data extraction and evidence synthesis. Overall, a mixed level of evidence was found for OHS interventions. Levels of evidence for interventions associated with positive effects were: Moderate evidence for arm supports; and Limited evidence for ergonomics training plus workstation adjustments, new chair and rest breaks. Levels of evidence for interventions associated with "no effect" were: Strong evidence for workstation adjustment alone; Moderate evidence for biofeedback training and job stress management training; and Limited evidence for cognitive behavioral training. No interventions were associated with "negative effects". CONCLUSION: It is difficult to make strong evidenced-based recommendations about what practitioners should do to prevent or manage upper extremity MSDs. There is a paucity of high quality OHS interventions evaluating upper extremity MSDs and none focused on traumatic injury outcomes or workplace mandated pre-placement screening exams. We recommend that worksites not engage in OHS activities that include only workstation adjustments. However, when combined with ergonomics training, there is limited evidence that workstation adjustments are beneficial. A practice to consider is using arm supports to reduce upper extremity MSDs.