跨学科手术室人体工学需求和优先事项:手术室工作人员调查。

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Alexis Mah, Fahad Alam, Jeremie Larouche, Marie-Antonette Dandal, Tara Cohen, Susan Hallbeck, Hamid Norasi, Csilla Kallocsai, Sapna Sriram, James D Helman, Julie Hallet
{"title":"跨学科手术室人体工学需求和优先事项:手术室工作人员调查。","authors":"Alexis Mah, Fahad Alam, Jeremie Larouche, Marie-Antonette Dandal, Tara Cohen, Susan Hallbeck, Hamid Norasi, Csilla Kallocsai, Sapna Sriram, James D Helman, Julie Hallet","doi":"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006582","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine perceived OR ergonomics facilitators and barriers, with a focus on the interdisciplinary team.</p><p><strong>Summary background data: </strong>Poor ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries affecting all operating room (OR) staff with repercussions on patient care, outcomes, and sustainability. Lack of ergonomic awareness and education are risk factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a self-administered web-based survey of OR nurses, surgeons, and anesthesiologists at a single centre (n=238). We developed a questionnaire through items generation and reduction, followed by reliability and validity testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Response rate was 53.8%. Respondents perceived that on average 80% of nurses, 70% of surgeons, and 40% anesthesiologists experienced MSK injuries, with no difference in professional groups' perceptions. Guideline ergonomics interventions were rarely used (<25%) except for specialized clothing (33%), equipment repositioning (59%), and seating (37%), though perceived beneficial by 80-90%. Reported barriers to optimal ergonomics were organizational/structural (lack of time, space, equipment, funding), whereas solutions were individual. Fear of unfavourable perception from others was a concern for 62%. Teams discussing, prioritizing, monitoring, or helping with ergonomics was indicated by <50%. Individual ergonomic adaptations were perceived as convenience by other staff.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While structural/organizational issues are reported as barriers to ergonomics, solutions appeared as individual responsibilities. Team dynamics did not prioritize nor support ergonomics. Education tools leveraging the interdisciplinary team are warranted. This work will be supplemented by interviews and live observations to build tailored educational tools for OR teams.</p>","PeriodicalId":8017,"journal":{"name":"Annals of surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Interdisciplinary Operating Room Ergonomics Needs and Priorities: A Survey of Operating Room Staff.\",\"authors\":\"Alexis Mah, Fahad Alam, Jeremie Larouche, Marie-Antonette Dandal, Tara Cohen, Susan Hallbeck, Hamid Norasi, Csilla Kallocsai, Sapna Sriram, James D Helman, Julie Hallet\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SLA.0000000000006582\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To examine perceived OR ergonomics facilitators and barriers, with a focus on the interdisciplinary team.</p><p><strong>Summary background data: </strong>Poor ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries affecting all operating room (OR) staff with repercussions on patient care, outcomes, and sustainability. Lack of ergonomic awareness and education are risk factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a self-administered web-based survey of OR nurses, surgeons, and anesthesiologists at a single centre (n=238). We developed a questionnaire through items generation and reduction, followed by reliability and validity testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Response rate was 53.8%. Respondents perceived that on average 80% of nurses, 70% of surgeons, and 40% anesthesiologists experienced MSK injuries, with no difference in professional groups' perceptions. Guideline ergonomics interventions were rarely used (<25%) except for specialized clothing (33%), equipment repositioning (59%), and seating (37%), though perceived beneficial by 80-90%. Reported barriers to optimal ergonomics were organizational/structural (lack of time, space, equipment, funding), whereas solutions were individual. Fear of unfavourable perception from others was a concern for 62%. Teams discussing, prioritizing, monitoring, or helping with ergonomics was indicated by <50%. Individual ergonomic adaptations were perceived as convenience by other staff.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While structural/organizational issues are reported as barriers to ergonomics, solutions appeared as individual responsibilities. Team dynamics did not prioritize nor support ergonomics. Education tools leveraging the interdisciplinary team are warranted. This work will be supplemented by interviews and live observations to build tailored educational tools for OR teams.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8017,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006582\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000006582","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:研究手术室工效促进因素和障碍,重点关注跨学科团队:不良的人体工程学设计会造成肌肉骨骼损伤,影响手术室(OR)的所有工作人员,并对患者护理、治疗效果和可持续性产生影响。缺乏人体工程学意识和教育是风险因素:方法:我们对一个中心的手术室护士、外科医生和麻醉师(人数为 238 人)进行了一次自填式网络调查。我们通过项目生成和缩减开发了调查问卷,随后进行了信度和效度测试:结果:回复率为 53.8%。受访者认为,平均 80% 的护士、70% 的外科医生和 40% 的麻醉师都经历过 MSK 损伤,各专业群体的看法没有差异。很少使用人体工程学指南干预措施(结论:虽然报告称结构/组织问题是人体工程学的障碍,但解决方案似乎是个人的责任。团队动力既不优先考虑也不支持人体工程学。需要利用跨学科团队的教育工具。这项工作将通过访谈和现场观察加以补充,为手术室团队量身打造教育工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Interdisciplinary Operating Room Ergonomics Needs and Priorities: A Survey of Operating Room Staff.

Objective: To examine perceived OR ergonomics facilitators and barriers, with a focus on the interdisciplinary team.

Summary background data: Poor ergonomics causes musculoskeletal injuries affecting all operating room (OR) staff with repercussions on patient care, outcomes, and sustainability. Lack of ergonomic awareness and education are risk factors.

Methods: We conducted a self-administered web-based survey of OR nurses, surgeons, and anesthesiologists at a single centre (n=238). We developed a questionnaire through items generation and reduction, followed by reliability and validity testing.

Results: Response rate was 53.8%. Respondents perceived that on average 80% of nurses, 70% of surgeons, and 40% anesthesiologists experienced MSK injuries, with no difference in professional groups' perceptions. Guideline ergonomics interventions were rarely used (<25%) except for specialized clothing (33%), equipment repositioning (59%), and seating (37%), though perceived beneficial by 80-90%. Reported barriers to optimal ergonomics were organizational/structural (lack of time, space, equipment, funding), whereas solutions were individual. Fear of unfavourable perception from others was a concern for 62%. Teams discussing, prioritizing, monitoring, or helping with ergonomics was indicated by <50%. Individual ergonomic adaptations were perceived as convenience by other staff.

Conclusions: While structural/organizational issues are reported as barriers to ergonomics, solutions appeared as individual responsibilities. Team dynamics did not prioritize nor support ergonomics. Education tools leveraging the interdisciplinary team are warranted. This work will be supplemented by interviews and live observations to build tailored educational tools for OR teams.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Annals of surgery
Annals of surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
4.40%
发文量
687
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Annals of Surgery is a renowned surgery journal, recognized globally for its extensive scholarly references. It serves as a valuable resource for the international medical community by disseminating knowledge regarding important developments in surgical science and practice. Surgeons regularly turn to the Annals of Surgery to stay updated on innovative practices and techniques. The journal also offers special editorial features such as "Advances in Surgical Technique," offering timely coverage of ongoing clinical issues. Additionally, the journal publishes monthly review articles that address the latest concerns in surgical practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信