Participatory organizational intervention for improved use of assistive devices in patient transfer: a single-blinded cluster randomized controlled trial

• Main Authors: Markus D Jakobsen, Birgit Aust, Pete Kines, Pascal Madeleine, Lars L Andersen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Nordic Association of Occupational Safety and Health (NOROSH) 2019-03-01
• Series: Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
• Subjects: patient lift; assistive device; musculoskeletal disorder; cluster randomized controlled trial; back pain; participatory organizational intervention; occupational health; occupational injury; patient transfer; health care; intervention; randomized controlled trial; injury; occupational accident; objective measure; rct; work accident; process evaluation
• Online Access: https://www.sjweh.fi/show_abstract.php?abstract_id=3769

OBJECTIVES: This randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the effect of a participatory organizational intervention for improved use of assistive devices (AD) in patient transfer. METHODS: We randomly allocated 27 departments from five hospitals in Denmark to a participatory intervention (14 clusters, 316 healthcare workers) or a control group (13 clusters, 309 healthcare workers). The intervention consisted of 2×2 hour workshops with managers, the hospital’s health and safety staff, and 2–5 healthcare workers from each department. Based on an assessment of barriers and solutions conducted prior to randomization, participants developed an action plan for implementing department-specific solutions for improving the use of AD. Use of necessary AD (using digital counters as primary outcome), and general use of AD (using accelerometers as secondary outcome), pain intensity in the low-back, work-related back injuries during patient transfer, and communication and guidance in the use of AD were measured at baseline, 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Use of necessary AD (primary outcome), low-back pain, and back injuries did not change in the intervention compared with control group at 12-month follow-up. However, general use of AD measured with accelerometers as well as communication and guidance improved significantly in the intervention versus control group. CONCLUSION: The intervention did not result in more frequent use of the necessary AD but led to more general use of AD, as well as increased communication and guidance.