Outcomes of safe patient handling and mobilization programs: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Variability in patient care settings and the range of patient handling tasks present challenges in developing and evaluating safe patient handling and mobilization (SPHM) programs. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic meta-analysis of SPHM program evaluations. METHODS: Systematic literat...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Work (Reading, Mass.) Mass.), 2017-01, Vol.58 (2), p.173-184
Main Authors: Teeple, Erin, Collins, Jamie E., Shrestha, Swastina, Dennerlein, Jack T., Losina, Elena, Katz, Jeffrey N.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Handling
Humans
Identification methods
Injury prevention
Intervention
Literature reviews
Meta-analysis
Moving and Lifting Patients - adverse effects
Musculoskeletal Diseases - etiology
Musculoskeletal Diseases - prevention & control
Occupational Health - standards
Occupational Injuries - prevention & control
Patient handling
Program Evaluation - standards
Regression analysis
Studies
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:BACKGROUND: Variability in patient care settings and the range of patient handling tasks present challenges in developing and evaluating safe patient handling and mobilization (SPHM) programs. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic meta-analysis of SPHM program evaluations. METHODS: Systematic literature review identified published SPHM program evaluations. Injury Rate Ratios (IRR), pre- to post-intervention, were used to estimate intervention effects and to examine the influence of patient care level, program components, and follow-up time using meta-regression. RESULTS: 27 articles reported evaluations from 44 sites. Combined effect estimate for all SPHM programs was 0.44 (95% CI 0.36, 0.54), reflecting substantial injury reductions after program implementation. While specific program components were not associated with greater effectiveness, longer follow-up duration was associated with greater injury rate reduction (p = 0.01) and intervention effects varied by level of care (p = 0.01), with the greatest effect in intensive care unit interventions (IRR 0.14; 95% CI 0.07, 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: SPHM programs appear to be highly effective in reducing injuries. More research is needed to identify the most effective interventions for different patient care levels.
ISSN:1051-9815
1875-9270
DOI:10.3233/WOR-172608