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.

Process and implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions: a systematic review.

Participatory ergonomic (PE) interventions may vary in implementation. A systematic review was done to determine the evidence regarding context, barriers and facilitators to the implementation of participatory ergonomic interventions in workplaces. In total, 17 electronic databases were searched. Data on PE process and implementation were extracted from documents meeting content and quality criteria and synthesised. The search yielded 2151 references. Of these, 190 documents were relevant and 52 met content and quality criteria. Different ergonomic teams were described in the documents as were the type, duration and content of ergonomic training. PE interventions tended to focus on physical and work process changes and report positive impacts. Resources, programme support, ergonomic training, organisational training and communication were the most often noted facilitators or barriers. Successful PE interventions require the right people to be involved, appropriate ergonomic training and clear responsibilities. Addressing key facilitators and barriers such as programme support, resources, and communication is paramount. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: A recent systematic review has suggested that PE has some effect on reducing symptoms, lost days of work and claims. Systematic reviews of effectiveness provide practitioners with the desire to implement but do not provide clear information about how. This article reviews the literature on process and implementation of PE.

Stakeholder engagement opportunities in systematic reviews: knowledge transfer for policy and practice.

Knowledge transfer and exchange is the process of increasing the awareness and use of research evidence in policy or practice decision making by nonresearch audiences or stakeholders. One way to accomplish this end is through ongoing interaction between researchers and interested nonresearch audiences, which provides an opportunity for the two groups to learn more about one another. The purpose of this article is to describe and discuss various stakeholder engagement opportunities that we employ throughout the stages of conducting a systematic review, to increase knowledge utilization within these audiences. Systematic reviews of the literature on a particular topic can provide an unbiased overview of the state of the literature. The engagement opportunities we have identified are topic consultation, feedback meetings during the review, member of review team, and involvement in dissemination. The potential benefits of including stakeholders in the process of a systematic review include increased relevance, clarity, and awareness of systematic review findings. A further benefit is the potential for increased dissemination of the findings. Challenges that researchers face are that stakeholder interactions can be time- and resource-intensive, it can be difficult balancing stakeholder desires with scientific rigor, and stakeholders may have difficulties accepting findings with which they do not agree. Despite these challenges we have included stakeholder involvement as a permanent step in the procedure of conducting a systematic review.