Spelling suggestions: "subject:"patiently i tem"" "subject:"patiently i term""
1 |
Biomekanisk analys av patientlyft i teamFogelberg, Susanne, Sessman, Loisa January 2008 (has links)
<p>Background: The majority of the occupational accidents and work-related diseases at Swedish workplaces occur due to poor ergonomics during lifts and transportation of objects. The most common consequence of poor ergonomic conditions is low back pain (LBP) and the risk of developing LBP increases as the mechanical loading on the intervertebral disks grows. This study has investigated the biomechanical loading in the low back during two different types of patient lifts. The first lift (lift A) is developed by Modern Arbetsteknik (MA) and the second lift (lift B) is a common lifting technique among care workers. </p><p>Objectives: The aim of the study was to identify any advantages or disadvantages with MA’s lift, regarding shear and compression forces in the L5/S1 disc. The calculated forces were also compared with lifting recommendations from the Swedish Work Environment Authority and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).</p><p>Methods: The lifting techniques were evaluated with biomechanical calculations, Dartfish video analysis software, Qualisys motion capture system and the biomechanical analysis software Visual3D. </p><p>Results: Lift A was less stressful on the low back than lift B. Particularly during lift start, when the mechanical loading from the patient reaches the highest level. The disadvantage of lift B is that it results in greater axial rotation and asymmetrical loading. This causes greater shear and torsion forces, which are associated with LBP. </p><p>Conclusions: The mechanical loading of the spine exceeds the limits recommended by the Swedish Work Environment Authority and NIOSH. Therefore the maximum allowed patient weight for a three person lift should be lowered, in order to reduce the risk for LBP.</p>
|
2 |
Biomekanisk analys av patientlyft i teamFogelberg, Susanne, Sessman, Loisa January 2008 (has links)
Background: The majority of the occupational accidents and work-related diseases at Swedish workplaces occur due to poor ergonomics during lifts and transportation of objects. The most common consequence of poor ergonomic conditions is low back pain (LBP) and the risk of developing LBP increases as the mechanical loading on the intervertebral disks grows. This study has investigated the biomechanical loading in the low back during two different types of patient lifts. The first lift (lift A) is developed by Modern Arbetsteknik (MA) and the second lift (lift B) is a common lifting technique among care workers. Objectives: The aim of the study was to identify any advantages or disadvantages with MA’s lift, regarding shear and compression forces in the L5/S1 disc. The calculated forces were also compared with lifting recommendations from the Swedish Work Environment Authority and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Methods: The lifting techniques were evaluated with biomechanical calculations, Dartfish video analysis software, Qualisys motion capture system and the biomechanical analysis software Visual3D. Results: Lift A was less stressful on the low back than lift B. Particularly during lift start, when the mechanical loading from the patient reaches the highest level. The disadvantage of lift B is that it results in greater axial rotation and asymmetrical loading. This causes greater shear and torsion forces, which are associated with LBP. Conclusions: The mechanical loading of the spine exceeds the limits recommended by the Swedish Work Environment Authority and NIOSH. Therefore the maximum allowed patient weight for a three person lift should be lowered, in order to reduce the risk for LBP.
|
Page generated in 0.0982 seconds