The "sweet- and sour-spot" of occupational physical activity for back pain: a prospective accelerometer study among eldercare workers.

OBJECTIVES: Both high and low levels of occupational physical activity are associated with back pain. Thus, there might be a "sweet- and sour-spot" of occupational physical activity for back pain. Our aim was to investigate if there exists an occupational physical activity "sweet- (lowest risk) and sour-spot" (highest risk) for back pain. METHODS: A total of 396 eldercare workers from 20 Danish nursing homes participated. Occupational physical activity was measured between 1-4 working days using thigh-worn accelerometry. Back pain intensity was reported monthly on a scale from 0-10 over 1-year. A zero-inflated mixed-effects model was developed regressing occupational physical activity against back pain, adjusted for confounders. The "sweet- and sour-spot" were defined as the occupational physical activity compositions (sitting, standing, light, and moderate-to-vigorous) associated with the 5% lowest and highest risk for back pain, respectively. RESULTS: The composition associated with the lowest risk of back pain - the "sweet-spot"- consisted of 71% worktime spent sitting, 18% spent standing, 5% spent on light physical activity and 6% spent on moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. The composition associated with highest risk for back pain -the "sour-spot"- consisted of 8% worktime spent sitting, 66% spent standing, 4% spent on light physical activity, and 21% spent on moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: The "sweet-spot" of occupational physical activity for back pain among eldercare workers involves more sitting and light physical activity time, while the "sour-spot" involves more standing and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity time. Research on the occupational physical activity "sweet- and sour-spot" is needed.

The Influence of Nursing Home, Ward, and Eldercare Workers on the Number of Resident Handlings Performed per Shift in Eldercare.

The purpose of our study was to investigate which organizational levels and factors determine the number of resident handlings in eldercare. We conducted a multi-level study, stratified on day and evening shifts, including information on four levels: nursing homes (n = 20), wards within nursing homes (day, n = 120; evening, n = 107), eldercare workers within wards (day, n = 619; evening, n = 382), and within eldercare workers (i.e., days within eldercare workers; day, n = 5572; evening, n = 2373). We evaluated the influence of each level on the number of resident handlings using variance components analysis and multivariate generalized linear mixed models. All four levels contributed to the total variance in resident handlings during day and evening shifts, with 13%/20% at "nursing homes", 21%/33% at "wards within nursing homes", 25%/31% at "elder-care workers within wards", and 41%/16% "within eldercare workers", respectively. The percentage of residents with a higher need for physical assistance, number of residents per shift, occupational position (only within day shifts), and working hours per week (only within day shifts) were significantly associated with the number of resident handlings performed per shift. Interventions aiming to modify number of resident handlings in eldercare ought to target all levels of the eldercare organization.

Medication-related experiences of patients with polypharmacy: a systematic review of qualitative studies.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to synthesise qualitative studies exploring medication-related experiences of polypharmacy among patients with multimorbidity. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature in February 2020 for primary, peer-reviewed qualitative studies about multimorbid patients' medication-related experiences with polypharmacy, defined as the use of four or more medications. Identified studies were appraised for methodological quality by applying the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for qualitative research, and data were extracted and synthesised by the meta-aggregation approach. RESULTS: We included 13 qualitative studies, representing 499 patients with polypharmacy and a wide range of chronic conditions. Overall, most Critical Appraisal Skills Programme items were reported in the studies. We extracted 140 findings, synthesised these into 17 categories, and developed five interrelated syntheses: (1) patients with polypharmacy are a heterogeneous group in terms of needing and appraising medication information; (2) patients are aware of the importance of medication adherence, but it is difficult to achieve; (3) decision-making about medications is complex; (4) multiple relational factors affect communication between patients and physicians, and these factors can prevent patients from disclosing important information; and (5) polypharmacy affects patients' lives and self-perception, and challenges with polypharmacy are not limited to practical issues of medication-taking. DISCUSSION: Polypharmacy poses many challenges to patients, which have a negative impact on quality of life and adherence. Thus, when dealing with polypharmacy patients, it is crucial that healthcare professionals actively solicit individual patients' perspectives on challenges related to polypharmacy. Based on the reported experiences, we recommend that healthcare professionals upscale communicative efforts and involve patients' social network on an individualised basis to facilitate shared decision-making and treatment adherence in multimorbidpatients with polypharmacy.