Development of a New Tool to Combine the Promotion of Patient Mobility With Safe Patient Handling Equipment: The Johns Hopkins Safe Patient Handling Mobility (JH-SPHM) Guide.

BACKGROUND: Promoting safe patient mobility for providers and patients is a safety priority in the hospital setting. Safe patient handling equipment aids safe mobility but can also deter active movement by the patient if used inappropriately. Nurses need guidance to choose equipment that ensures their safety and that of the patients while promoting active mobility and preventing workplace-related injury. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi approach with a diverse group of experts, we created the Johns Hopkins Safe Patient Handling Mobility (JH-SPHM) Guide. This diverse group of 10 experts consisted of nurses, nurse leaders, physical and occupational therapists, safe patient handling committee representatives, and a fall prevention committee leader. The application of the tool was then tested in the hospital environment by two physical therapists. FINDINGS: Consensus was reached for safe patient handling (SPH) equipment recommendations at each level of the Johns Hopkins Mobility Goal Calculator (JH-Mobility Goal Calculator). Expert SPH equipment recommendations were then added to JH-Mobility Goal Calculator levels to create the JH-Safe Patient Handling Mobility Guide. JH-Safe Patient Handling Mobility Guide equipment suggestions were compared with equipment recommendations from physical therapists revealing strong agreement (n = 125, 88%). CONCLUSION: The newly created JH-Safe Patient Handling Mobility Guide provides appropriate safe patient-handling equipment recommendations to help accomplish patients' daily mobility goals. APPLICATIONS TO PRACTICE: The Johns Hopkins Safe Patient Handling Mobility Guide simultaneously facilitates patient mobility and optimizes safety for nursing staff through recommendations for safe patient handling equipment for use with hospitalized patients.

A mixed methods approach to describe the efficacy of lift assist device use to reduce low back musculoskeletal disorder risk factors during three common patient extrication scenarios.

This mixed-method study evaluated the efficacy of lift assist device use (Binder®, Eagle®, Maxi Air®) relative to manual lifting/care-as-usual in reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during simulated patient extrication tasks. User feedback was recorded to identify factors that might influence use. Twenty paramedics performed a floor to stretcher lift, lateral transfer, and confined space extrication care-as-usual and with lift assist devices. Use of a lift assist reduced low back muscle activity during floor to stretcher and confined space tasks by 34-47%. Paramedics perceived exertion decreased from 'somewhat hard' to 'light' or 'very light' when using an assistive device. Paramedics noted that ease of use, patient comfort, task time, patient acuity, among other considerations would influence use decisions. Lift assist devices were efficacious at reducing low back muscle activity and perceived exertion during floor to stretcher and patient extrication tasks.

Guidelines in Practice: Safe Patient Handling and Movement.

The perioperative environment presents unique ergonomic challenges related to lifting and moving patients. These challenges place perioperative team members and patients at an increased risk for injury. The updated AORN "Guideline for safe patient handling and movement" provides perioperative nurses with guidance on safe patient handling and movement practices to help minimize the incidence of injuries to patients and health care workers. This article provides an overview of the guideline and discusses recommendations for a safe patient handling and mobility (SPHM) program, ergonomic planning and facility design, SPHM technology, an individualized SPHM and ergonomic plan, and fall risk and mobility assessments. It also includes a scenario describing concerns related to patient and perioperative team member safety. Perioperative nurses should review the guideline in its entirety and apply the recommendations for safe patient handling and movement.

Kinematic analysis of preparation for transferring from wheelchair to bed.

This study aimed to clarify the kinematics, particularly of the shoulder and hip joints, during preparation for manual wheelchair-to-bed transfer (i.e. when flipping up the arm and foot supports). This cross-sectional study included 32 able-bodied individuals. The kinematics of the shoulder and hip joints when the arm and foot supports were flipped up of manual wheelchair, were evaluated using a markerless inertial sensor-based motion capture system. We found that flipping the arm support upwards involved a large amount of abduction, internal and external rotation, flexion, and extension at the shoulder joint, whereas flipping the foot support upwards involved a large amount of flexion at the hip joint. The findings suggest that it is necessary to consider the range of motion required to flip up the arm and foot supports of manual wheelchairs, particularly in those with limited shoulder and hip range of motion such as older people, neuromuscular disorders, and orthopedic disorders.

Early Mobilization Using a Mobile Patient Lift in the ICU: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To ascertain whether a mobile patient lift facilitates early mobilization in ventilated ICU patients. DESIGN: A single-center, open-label, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: An academic ICU in Tokyo. PATIENTS: Eighty patients were admitted to ICU and expected ventilation for at least 48 hours. INTERVENTIONS: In the intervention group, in addition to the rehabilitation protocol received by the control group, patients were assisted in sitting, standing, transfers, and walking using the mobile patient lift. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The intervention group predominantly stood faster than the control group (1.0 vs. 3.0 d, p < 0.01). The Intervention group also had significantly higher Functional Status Score-ICU scores at ICU discharge. However, the Medical Research Council score and Barthel index at discharge, length of ICU stay, and number of ventilator-free days did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of mobile patient lifts facilitates the earlier standing of patients on ventilators. This may contribute to patients improved physical function in the ICU. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was registered with the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) under the registration number UMIN000044965. Registered July 30, 2021.

Save Your Back: Comparison of the Compressive Force on the Lower Back Based on Differences in the Training Techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Musculoskeletal injury prevention for nurses is aimed at removing the need to manually position patients. In the ED, this is not always possible or practical. The purpose of this study is to compare the calculated estimated compressive force on the lumbar spine between recommended lifting techniques and the SHAPE lifting method during the horizontal transfer of a patient. METHODS: Twenty-one student nurses completed the horizontal transfer of a simulated patient while motion was collected using inertial measurement units. Motion data were analyzed to calculate an estimated compressive force on the lumbar spine while completing the movement based on current recommended lifting methods and while using the SHAPE lifting method. RESULTS: A significant reduction in estimated peak and average compressive force at the lumbar spine was found during both the push and the pull portions (P < .001) of the horizontal transfer. DISCUSSION: While the optimal way to limit musculoskeletal injury among nurses is to eliminate the need for manual handling of a patient, this is not always possible in the ED. It is critical that when emergency nurses must reposition a patient, they perform the movement in the most biomechanically sound method while using a friction reduction. These findings, coupled with the previous biomechanical risk factor reduction related to the SHAPE lifting intervention, gives promise to a safer lifting strategy for emergency nurses moving forward.

Comparing Pressure Injury Incidence Based on Repositioning Intervals and Support Surfaces in Acute Care Settings: A Quasi-Experimental Pragmatic Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare pressure injury (PI) incidence based on repositioning intervals and support surfaces in acute care settings. METHODS: This pragmatic, quasi-experimental trial recruited a total of 251 critically ill patients who were at low or moderate risk for PI development. Participants were assigned to three interventions: a 2-hour repositioning interval using an air mattress, a 2-hour repositioning interval using a foam mattress, or a 3-hour repositioning interval using a foam mattress. Data were collected by nurses every shift over the course of 14 days. Pressure injury incidence was analyzed using a χ2 test. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in PI incidence between the groups with a 2-hour repositioning interval. However, the PI incidence in the group using a foam mattress with a 3-hour repositioning interval was significantly lower than in the group using an air mattress with a 2-hour repositioning interval (odds ratio, 0.481; 95% confidence interval, 0.410-0.565). CONCLUSIONS: The findings showed that PIs decreased when the repositioning interval was extended from every 2 hours to every 3 hours while using foam mattresses. This study suggests that a 3-hour repositioning interval using a foam mattress could be applied to reduce the risk of PI development for patients at low or moderate risk.

Impact of California Safe Patient Handling Legislation: Health Care Workers' Perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal injuries from patient handling are significant problems among health care workers. In California, legislation requiring hospitals to implement safe patient handling (SPH) programs was enacted in 2011. This qualitative study explored workers' experiences and perceptions about the law, their hospital's SPH policies and programs, patient handling practices, and work environment. METHODS: Three focus groups were conducted with 21 participants (19 nurses and 2 patient handling specialists) recruited from 12 hospitals located in the San Francisco Bay Area and San Joaquin Valley. Qualitative content analysis was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Multiple themes emerged from diverse experiences and perceptions. Positive perceptions included empowerment to advocate for safety, increased awareness of SPH policies and programs, increased provision of patient handling equipment and training, increased lift use, and improvement in safety culture. Perceived concerns included continuing barriers to safe practices and lift use such as difficulty securing assistance, limited availability of lift teams, understaffing, limited nursing employee input in the safety committee, blaming of individuals for injury, increased workload, and continuing injury concerns. Participants indicated the need for effective training, sufficient staffing, and management support for injured workers. CONCLUSIONS/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE: This study identified improvements in hospitals' SPH programs and practices since the passage of California's SPH law, as well as continuing challenges and barriers to safe practices and injury prevention. The findings provide useful information to understanding the positive impacts of the SPH law but also notes the potential limitations of this legislation in the view of health care workers.

Using a Mechanical Lift at Home.

This article is part of a series, Supporting Family Caregivers: No Longer Home Alone, published in collaboration with the AARP Public Policy Institute. Results of focus groups, conducted as part of the AARP Public Policy Institute's No Longer Home Alone video project, supported evidence that family caregivers aren't given the information they need to manage the complex care regimens of family members. This series of articles and accompanying videos aims to help nurses provide caregivers with the tools they need to manage their family member's health care at home. Nurses should read the articles first, so they understand how best to help family caregivers. Then they can refer caregivers to the informational tear sheet-Information for Family Caregivers-and instructional videos, encouraging them to ask questions. For additional information, see Resources for Nurses.

Proning Patients With COVID-19: A Review of Equipment and Methods.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and critically evaluate methods for proning patients with COVID-19 in the intensive care unit (ICU). BACKGROUND: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is common in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Proning improves blood oxygenation and survival rates in these patients but is not commonly performed due to the difficulty of the procedure. METHODS: An academic literature review, internet video search, and consultation with five subject-matter experts was performed to identify known methods for proning. Evaluation of each method considered the number of healthcare workers required, physical stresses on staff, risk of adverse events to patients, and equipment cost and availability. RESULTS: Several variations of manual techniques and-lift assisted techniques were identified in addition to a specialized proning bed. Manual methods require more healthcare workers, higher physical stresses, and greater risk of adverse events than lift-assisted methods or the proning bed. CONCLUSION: Both the specialized proning bed and a lift-assisted method using straps largely eliminated manual forces required for proning while allowing for a controlled lowering and positioning of the patient. APPLICATION: This review will guide practitioners to the most suitable methods for proning patients in the ICU.

An ergonomic assessment of using laterally-tilting operating room tables and friction reducing devices for patient lateral transfers.

Patient lateral transfers between two adjacent surfaces pose high musculoskeletal disorder risks for nurses and patient handlers. The purpose of this research was to examine the ergonomic benefits of utilizing the laterally-tilting function of operating room (OR) tables during such transfers - along with different friction-reducing devices (FRD). This method allows the patient to slide down to the adjacent surface as one nurse guides the transfer and another controls the OR table angle with a remote control. Sixteen nursing students and sixteen college students were recruited to act as nurses and patients, respectively. Two OR table angles were examined: flat and tilted. Three FRD conditions were considered: a standard blanket sheet, a plastic bag, and a slide board. Electromyography (EMG) activities were measured bilaterally from the posterior deltoids, upper trapezii, latissimus dorsi, and lumbar erector spinae muscles. The Borg-CR10 scale was used for participants to rate their perceived physical exertions. The efficiency of each method was measured using a stopwatch. Results showed that the tilted table technique completely replaced the physical efforts that would have been exerted by the pushing-nurse, in that muscle activation did not increase in the pulling-nurse. On the contrary, EMG activities of the pulling-nurse for most of the muscles significantly decreased (p < 0.05). The subjective Borg-ratings also favored the tilted table with significantly lower ratings. However, the tilted table required on average 7.22 s more than the flat table to complete the transfer (p < 0.05). The slide board and plastic bag were associated with significantly lower Borg-ratings and EMG activities for most muscles than blanket sheet, but they both were not significantly different from each other. However, they each required approximately 5 s more than the blanket sheet method to complete the patient transfer (p < 0.05). By switching from flat + blanket sheet to tilted + slide board, EMG activities in all muscles decreased in the range of 18.4-72.3%, and Borg-ratings decreased from about 4 (somewhat difficult) to 1 (very light). The findings of this study propose simple, readily available ergonomic interventions for performing patient lateral transfers that can have significant implications for nurses' wellbeing and efficiency.

Air-assisted devices reduce biomechanical loading in the low back and upper extremities during patient turning tasks.

This laboratory study evaluated different assistive devices for reducing biomechanical loading during patient turning tasks. Twenty caregivers (18 females and 2 males) performed standardized patient turning tasks with two simulated patients (body mass: 74 kg and 102 kg). The turning tasks were performed in two turning directions (toward vs. away relative to caregivers) using five device conditions: draw sheet, friction-reducing turning sheet, air-assisted transfer device, air-assisted turning device, and no assistive device. Low back and upper extremity muscle activity, trunk and shoulder postures, low back moment, and self-reported usability ratings were evaluated. While all assistive devices reduced trunk flexion, both air-assisted transfer and turning devices reduced the trunk flexion (p's < 0.001) and muscle activity (p's < 0.001) in the erector spinae and triceps compared to no assistive device condition. These results suggest that the air-assisted devices have potential as an effective intervention to considerably reduce physical risk factors associated with caregivers' musculoskeletal disorders in low back and upper extremities.

Reducing lumbar spine flexion using real-time biofeedback during patient handling tasks.

BACKGROUND: Patient handling activities require caregivers to adopt postures that increase the risk of back injury. Training programs relying primarily on didactic methods have been shown to be ineffective at reducing this risk. The use of real-time biofeedback has potential as an alternative training method. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of real-time biofeedback on time spent by caregivers in end-range lumbar spine flexion. METHODS: Novice participants were divided into intervention (n = 10) and control (n = 10) groups and were asked to perform a set of simulated care activities eight times on two consecutive days. Individuals in the intervention group watched a training video on safer movement strategies and received real-time auditory feedback from a wearable device (PostureCoach) in four training trials whenever their lumbar spine flexion exceeded a threshold (70% of maximum flexion). Changes in end-range lumbar spine flexion were compared between groups and across trials. RESULTS: Participants in the intervention group saw reductions in end-range lumbar spine flexion during the simulated patient handling tasks at the end of the training compared to their baseline trials while there was no change for the control group. CONCLUSIONS: The training program including PostureCoach has the potential to help caregivers learn to use safer postures that reduce the risk of back injury.

Bariatric Space, Technology, and Design: A Round Table.

BACKGROUND: Planning and executing healthcare for the patient or resident living with obesity can be a challenging task that has implications to the occupational health professional. METHODS: Leading global experts in the areas of occupational health, ergonomics, bariatrics, technology, and patient care were identified and invited to participate in a round table discussion. Questions posed to experts were based on literature that addressed patient handling and mobility, architectural design recommendations, clinical care of the person with obesity, and ergonomic guidelines. FINDINGS: Experts agreed that special considerations must be in place to care for the person who is obese. These special considerations should address not only clinical care of the patient, but ways to protect workers from occupational injury associated with clinical care. Experts suggested that, in some situations, a bariatric training suit may be helpful in better understanding space and design challenges, as well as a better understanding of the physical limitations associated with a larger body habitus (although simulated). Further, experts agreed that insensitivities often stem from failure to have proper space, technology and design accommodations in place. Conclusions/Application to Practice: The occupational health professional is a key resource to teams charged with planning and executing healthcare for the patient or resident living with obesity. Interprofessional understanding and communication can lead to a more comprehensive approach to space, design and technology that not only addresses the patient, but the worker providing direct care.

Insight Into the Movement Behaviors of Nursing Home Residents Living With Obesity: A Report of Two Cases.

Obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m2) can have a profound influence on the likelihood of developing a pressure injury (PrI); little is known about the movement behaviors (movement frequency, body position frequency, and position duration) of obese individuals. PURPOSE: This report examines 2 cases of obese nursing home residents and their movement behaviors in relation to their potential influence on overall PrI risk. METHODS: Resident movements were monitored 24 hours/day using a wearable sensor, and repositioning events were observed as part of a larger study examining repositioning intervals. Braden Pressure Ulcer Risk Assessment was conducted weekly. RESULTS: Both residents (BMI 39 kg/m2 and 50 kg/m2) had limitations in movement with prolonged periods spent in a single body position. Each resident addressed movement challenges unique to their desire to remain mobile and level of dependency on nursing staff. CONCLUSION: Presence of obesity is a factor affecting resident movement and creates environmental and psychosocial barriers to health. Nurses can play a key role in PrI prevention by addressing these barriers and encouraging positive, long-term behavior changes that mitigate risk. Future research should guide tailored PrI prevention protocols and national/ international guidelines for obese residents.