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.

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.

Comparing a patient positioning system to an overhead LIFT with pillows for impact on turning effectiveness.

BACKGROUND: Frequent patient handling activities present numerous challenges to healthcare workers. A variety of products are available to assist with in-bed positioning but few comparative studies have been completed to ascertain turning effectiveness. METHODS: The purpose of this study was to compare two turning devices (air-powered positioning system with wedges versus ceiling lift with pillows) for in-bed repositioning and turning effectiveness. The study took place at a large community hospital in the Midwestern USA and used a prospective, four-group crossover study design to compare devices. RESULTS: The two turning groups were not significantly different for any of the demographic variables. The use of an air-powered positioning system with wedges achieved a greater degree of turn and maintained that turn after an hour better than the lift device with pillows. There were no hospital acquired pressure injuries in either group. CONCLUSION: The devices used demonstrated significant differences in turn angle achieved and ability to maintain the turn at one hour. Future studies need to further delineate the ideal method for turning and compare devices to identify best practice and equipment. An effective turning method would integrate ease of use with the ability to achieve an optimal degree of turn in order to prevent hospital acquired pressure injuries while also decreasing caregiver injuries.

Can the Use of Turn-Assist Surfaces Reduce the Physical Burden on Caregivers When Performing Patient Turning?

OBJECTIVE: To quantify differences in physical workload afforded by turn-assist surfaces relative to manual patient turns, and between nursing caregivers (turn-away vs. turn-toward) while performing partnered patient turning. BACKGROUND: Nurse caregivers experience an increased risk of musculoskeletal injuries at the back or shoulders when performing patient-handling activities. Use of turn-assist surfaces can reduce the physical burden and risk on caregivers. METHOD: Whole-body motion capture and hand force measures were collected from 25 caregivers (17 female) while performing partnered manual and technology-facilitated turns. Shoulder and low back angles and L4/L5 joint contact forces were calculated at the instant of peak hand force application for both caregivers. RESULTS: Hand force requirements for the turn-away caregiver were 93% of the estimated maximum acceptable force when performing a manual turn. Use of a turn-assist surface eliminated hand forces required to initiate the patient turn for the turn-away caregiver, where their role was reduced to inserting appropriate wedging behind the patient once the facilitated turn was complete. This reduced shoulder moments by 21.3 Nm for the turn-away caregiver, a reduction in exposure from 70% of maximum shoulder strength capacity to 15%. Spine compression exposures were reduced by 302.1 N for the turn-toward caregiver when using a turn-assist surface. CONCLUSION: Use of a turn-assist surface reduced peak hand force and shoulder-related exposures for turning away and reduced spine-related exposures for turning toward. APPLICATION: Turn-assist devices should be recommended to decrease the risk of musculoskeletal disorder hazards for both caregivers when performing a partnered patient turn.

To what extent do paramedics apply safe handling principles when transferring patients from stair chairs to stretchers?

The efficiency of training programmes in handling designed to prevent injuries has rarely been demonstrated by studies in the workplace. This study aimed to identify factors that may favour or inhibit the application of safe handling principles by paramedics performing full-body transfers of patients from a stair chair to a stretcher. In an observational field study, handling methods used in 45 patient transfers from a stair chair to stretcher were characterised. Principles concerning the physical environment seem to be applied frequently, but those applicable during the transfer are neglected. Principles taught during training may not be applied due to the physical constraints of the workplace and the underestimation of risk exposure. The results suggest that training should be enhanced, not by focussing on handling techniques but by focussing on compromise and the capacity to adapt work techniques based on the working context and the team-mate.

How was a national moving and handling people guideline intended to work? The underlying programme theory.

In healthcare, moving and handling people (MHP) often cause musculoskeletal disorders. To prevent musculoskeletal disorders due to MHP, many national evidence-based guidelines have been developed. However, little is known about how these guidelines were intended to work, i.e. their 'programme theory', how implementation by intended users is influenced by contextual factors and mechanisms to produce outcomes. This paper identifies the programme theory of a national MHP guideline (MHPG) using thematic analysis of the MHPG document, three organisational planning documents, and interviews with MHPG developers. The analysis identified the intended users of the MHPG as health and safety managers and MHP coordinators. The programme theory comprised contextual factors, potentially hindering (e.g. budget constraints) or facilitating (e.g. changing demographics) implementation, being influenced by mechanisms mainly based on ethical (quality of care, evidence-based practices), and economic reasoning (reducing cost of MHP, return on investment) to reduce injuries caused by MHP - the intended outcome.

PROTECT - Trial: A cluster RCT to study the effectiveness of a repositioning aid and tailored repositioning to increase repositioning compliance.

AIM: To study the effectiveness of tailored repositioning and a turning and repositioning system on: (a) nurses' compliance to repositioning frequencies; (b) body posture of patients after repositioning; (c) incidence of pressure ulcers and incontinence-associated dermatitis; (d) nurses' and patients' preferences, comfort and acceptability; and (e) budget impact. BACKGROUND: Patient-tailored systematic repositioning is key in pressure ulcer prevention. To date, a clinical decision-making tool is lacking and compliance to pressure ulcer prevention guidelines is low. Research concerning commercially available turning and repositioning systems is lacking. DESIGN: Multicentre, cluster, three-arm, randomized, controlled pragmatic trial. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-seven patients at risk of pressure ulcer development were recruited at 29 wards in 16 hospitals between February 2016 and December 2017. Wards were randomly assigned to two experimental groups and one control group. RESULTS: Nurses' compliance to repositioning frequencies increased significantly in the experimental groups when patients were cared for in bed (94.6% vs. 69% and 84.9% vs. 71.4%). Applying the turning and repositioning system was associated with significantly more correctly positioned patients (30-45° tilted side-lying position) (69.6% vs. 34.6%). Few pressure ulcers and incontinence-associated dermatitis incidents occurred. Both patients and nurses were positive about the intervention. Higher labour costs related to repositioning in bed were found in the control group. CONCLUSION: This was the first study investigating the effect of tailored repositioning and the use of a repositioning aid to increase nurses' compliance to repositioning. The results were in favour of the interventions yet demonstrating the importance of follow-up and education. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT02690753;NCT02690753.

Guideline Implementation: Safe Patient Handling and Movement: 1.8 www.aornjournal.org/content/cme.

Physical stressors that occur with patient and equipment handling in the OR (eg, moving or lifting patients, carrying heavy instrument sets, prolonged standing) can contribute to musculoskeletal disorders for perioperative personnel. In addition to increasing patient safety, safe patient handling and movement (SPHM) programs have been shown to reduce the risk and severity of injuries, workers' compensation costs, and personnel fatigue and to increase health care workers' morale and quality of life. The AORN "Guideline for safe patient handling and movement" provides guidance for implementing an SPHM program. This article discusses key takeaways from the guideline, including forming an interdisciplinary team to oversee the SPHM program, selecting safe patient handling technologies and equipment, and assessing the unique needs of each patient to develop an individualized plan for SPHM. Perioperative RNs should review the complete guideline for additional information and for guidance when writing and updating policies and procedures.

Translational Acceleration, Rotational Speed, and Joint Angle of Patients Related to Correct/Incorrect Methods of Transfer Skills by Nurses.

Currently, due to shortages in the nursing faculty and low access to actual patients, it is difficult for students to receive feedback from teachers and practice with actual patients to obtain clinic experience. Thus, both evaluation systems and simulated patients have become urgent requirements. Accordingly, this study proposes a method to evaluate the nurse's transfer skill through observation from the patient. After verifying the proposed method, it will be integrated with a robotic patient as a future work. To verify if such an evaluation is practical, a checklist comprising 16 steps with correct and incorrect methods was proposed by the nursing teachers. Further, the evaluation parameters were determined as translational acceleration, rotational speed, and joint angle of patient. Inertial sensors and motion capture were employed to measure the translational acceleration, rotational speed, and joint angle. An experiment was conducted with two nursing teachers, who were asked to carry out both correct and incorrect methods. According to the results, three parameters reveal the difference for a patient under correct/incorrect methods and can further be used to evaluate the nurse's skill once the thresholds are determined. In addition, the applicability of inertial sensors is confirmed for the use of robot development.

Integrating a Standardized Mobility Program and Safe Patient Handling.

Early, routine mobilization of critically ill patients is safe and reduces hospital length of stay, shortens the duration of mechanical ventilation, and improves muscle strength and functional independence. At the University of Michigan, we have turned the tides by creating a structured process to get our patients moving while keeping them and our staff safe through the use of a standardized mobility protocol that incorporates the components of safe patient handling. Our protocol is simple and can easily be adapted for all patient populations by simply modifying some of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The protocol incorporates safe patient handling and mobility preassessment guidelines, mobility standards, equipment guidelines, and documentation tools. The activities are grounded in the evidence and well thought out to prevent complications, promote mobilization, and prevent patient and staff injuries. This article will discuss a how a tertiary care facility incorporated a safe patient-handling initiative into an existing mobility program and operationalized it across a health care system to keep our patients and staff safe.

Incorporating Safe Patient-Handling Techniques to Mobilize Our Most Complex Patients on Extra Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation.

Historically, patients supported on extra corporeal membrane oxygenation were thought to be too unstable to engage in early mobility but are at increased risk for deconditioning from prolonged immobilization due to the nature of illness, numerous cannulas, equipment, and hemodynamic and respiratory instability along with heavy sedation/analgesia or paralysis. This article will discuss the specific considerations that should be employed to keep the patient and the staff safe while providing mobility to patients on extra corporeal membrane oxygenation.

Safe Patient Handling and Mobility: Development and Implementation of a Large-Scale Education Program.

This article addresses the development, implementation, and evaluation of an education program for safe patient handling and mobility at a large academic medical center. The ultimate goal of the program was to increase safety during patient mobility/transfer and reduce nursing staff injury from lifting/pulling. This comprehensive program was designed on the basis of the principles of prework, application, and support at the point of care. A combination of online learning, demonstration, skill evaluation, and coaching at the point of care was used to achieve the goal. Specific roles and responsibilities were developed to facilitate implementation. It took 17 master trainers, 88 certified trainers, 176 unit-based trainers, and 98 coaches to put 3706 nurses and nursing assistants through the program. Evaluations indicated both an increase in knowledge about safe patient handling and an increased ability to safely mobilize patients. The challenge now is sustainability of safe patient-handling practices and the growth and development of trainers and coaches.