安全患者处理设备和技术的有效性:生物力学研究综述。

IF 2.9 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Human Factors Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-10 DOI:10.1177/00187208231211842
Mike Fray, Kermit G Davis
{"title":"安全患者处理设备和技术的有效性:生物力学研究综述。","authors":"Mike Fray, Kermit G Davis","doi":"10.1177/00187208231211842","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review aimed to evaluate all studies that have evaluated the biomechanical effects when using assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The physical demands of patient handling activities are well known. One safety strategy for the reduction of the physical risks is use of assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The search process identified articles published in English-speaking journals through Google Scholar, Medline, and ISI Web of Science. The included 56 studies contained a biomechanical assessment of a patient handling activity with assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The biomechanical effects included four groups: changes in body posture (spinal, other joints), subjective assessment (force, effort, discomfort), measured force (hand force, ground reaction force, spine force, joint torque), and physiological measures. The evidence showed caregivers benefited from using lift hoists, air-assisted devices, and to a lesser extent friction reducing devices for lateral transfers and repositioning, while floor and ceiling lifts were most effective for patient transfers. Some gaps were noted in the evidence and other handling tasks such as sit-to-stand, turning patient in bed, limb lifting, and repositioning and some more high hazard activities like supporting people with limited balance and those that fall need to be investigated with respect to biomechanical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a growing level of biomechanical evidence to support the use of assistive devices for many patient-handling tasks, but the benefits of equipment use in some transfers remain uninvestigated.</p><p><strong>Practical application: </strong>Evidence indicates the best way to lift patients safely is with floor or ceiling lifts, and air-assisted devices for lateral and repositioning tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11382441/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of Safe Patient Handling Equipment and Techniques: A Review of Biomechanical Studies.\",\"authors\":\"Mike Fray, Kermit G Davis\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187208231211842\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This review aimed to evaluate all studies that have evaluated the biomechanical effects when using assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The physical demands of patient handling activities are well known. One safety strategy for the reduction of the physical risks is use of assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The search process identified articles published in English-speaking journals through Google Scholar, Medline, and ISI Web of Science. The included 56 studies contained a biomechanical assessment of a patient handling activity with assistive devices.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The biomechanical effects included four groups: changes in body posture (spinal, other joints), subjective assessment (force, effort, discomfort), measured force (hand force, ground reaction force, spine force, joint torque), and physiological measures. The evidence showed caregivers benefited from using lift hoists, air-assisted devices, and to a lesser extent friction reducing devices for lateral transfers and repositioning, while floor and ceiling lifts were most effective for patient transfers. Some gaps were noted in the evidence and other handling tasks such as sit-to-stand, turning patient in bed, limb lifting, and repositioning and some more high hazard activities like supporting people with limited balance and those that fall need to be investigated with respect to biomechanical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>There is a growing level of biomechanical evidence to support the use of assistive devices for many patient-handling tasks, but the benefits of equipment use in some transfers remain uninvestigated.</p><p><strong>Practical application: </strong>Evidence indicates the best way to lift patients safely is with floor or ceiling lifts, and air-assisted devices for lateral and repositioning tasks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11382441/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231211842\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208231211842","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本综述旨在评估所有评估使用辅助器械时生物力学效果的研究。引言:患者处理活动的身体需求是众所周知的。减少身体风险的一个安全策略是使用辅助设备。方法:检索过程通过Google Scholar、Medline和ISI Web of Science来识别发表在英语期刊上的文章。纳入的56项研究包括对患者使用辅助设备进行活动的生物力学评估。结果:生物力学效应包括四组:身体姿势的变化(脊柱、其他关节)、主观评估(力、努力、不适)、测量力(手力、地面反作用力、脊柱力、关节力矩)和生理测量。证据表明,护理人员受益于使用升降机、空气辅助设备,以及在较小程度上减少摩擦的设备进行横向转移和重新定位,而地板和天花板升降机对患者转移最有效。在证据和其他处理任务中发现了一些差距,如从坐到站、在床上翻转患者、肢体提升和重新定位,以及一些更高风险的活动,如支持平衡受限的人和跌倒的人,需要就生物力学结果进行调查。结论:越来越多的生物力学证据支持在许多患者处理任务中使用辅助设备,但在某些转移中使用设备的好处仍未得到研究。实际应用:有证据表明,安全提升患者的最佳方法是使用地板或天花板升降机,以及用于横向和重新定位任务的空气辅助设备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effectiveness of Safe Patient Handling Equipment and Techniques: A Review of Biomechanical Studies.

Objective: This review aimed to evaluate all studies that have evaluated the biomechanical effects when using assistive devices.

Introduction: The physical demands of patient handling activities are well known. One safety strategy for the reduction of the physical risks is use of assistive devices.

Method: The search process identified articles published in English-speaking journals through Google Scholar, Medline, and ISI Web of Science. The included 56 studies contained a biomechanical assessment of a patient handling activity with assistive devices.

Results: The biomechanical effects included four groups: changes in body posture (spinal, other joints), subjective assessment (force, effort, discomfort), measured force (hand force, ground reaction force, spine force, joint torque), and physiological measures. The evidence showed caregivers benefited from using lift hoists, air-assisted devices, and to a lesser extent friction reducing devices for lateral transfers and repositioning, while floor and ceiling lifts were most effective for patient transfers. Some gaps were noted in the evidence and other handling tasks such as sit-to-stand, turning patient in bed, limb lifting, and repositioning and some more high hazard activities like supporting people with limited balance and those that fall need to be investigated with respect to biomechanical outcomes.

Conclusion: There is a growing level of biomechanical evidence to support the use of assistive devices for many patient-handling tasks, but the benefits of equipment use in some transfers remain uninvestigated.

Practical application: Evidence indicates the best way to lift patients safely is with floor or ceiling lifts, and air-assisted devices for lateral and repositioning tasks.

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
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
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