Work Injuries Among Nurses: Review of Prevalence

Employers will best serve their organizations by investing in preventative programs and processes to curtail the incidence and prevalence of MSDs as a result of either traumatic and or repetitive work injuries. Reviews of several research studies conducted by international and national authors, showed compelling associations and correlations of work related injuries among nurses working in various settings and shifts.

M. Shayesteh Azar et. al emphasized the magnitude of LBP among nurses, citing lifting as a primary injury mechanism with prolonged standing and rest as been aggravating and relieving factors, respectively. The impression is that repetitive lifting and poor lifting training and mechanics probably needed to be studied more elaborately to specify cause and effect relationship. Also, Hasnat Alamgir, et. al, cited full time direct patient care occupations as having a greater risk for work injury compared to part-time and casual health care workers, suggesting an apparent need to evaluate work demands and work hours. The functional issues of significance here is addressing the work capacity demands and the worker relationship in order to identify stressors and improve safety as a mean to proactively prevent injuries. As emphasized by Shoko Ando et. al, focusing on associated perceptions of job demands and MSDs among hospital nurses, suggested a likely association with actual work tasks , postures, condition of work and work organization. Also, Yassi A et. al, dissecting through epidemiological research on back injury in hospital nurses, suggested an increased prevalence among young and Junior level nurses working in orthopedic, neurology, medicine, spinal and surgery wards with lifting and patient transfers reported to be highest risk mechanisms, and inadequate training and staffing as risk factors. As health care system evolves, a positive correlations with neck, shoulder and back injury complaints are shown, suggesting a revisit to current health care changes to reduce adverse impact on the health of workers. In summary, the volume of evidence in regards to matching the work to the worker is compelling in realizing an effective work injury prevention and management program. It is clear that work injury is evident in routine work without a management process that comprises of an education, ergonomic and functional testing components. The key is for the employer to implement a process with both employee's and management ownership and active participation in a vision of a safe working environment.

As employers begin to realize the impact of health care and workers compensation costs to the organization bottom-line, it is compelling the outstanding adverse effect of an uncontrolled and poorly managed cost on growth, and profit at a crucial time of global economical slow-down. However, organization's still have an opportunity to reevaluate their system and implement a process to promote health, wellness and safety at the work place.

Dr. Diallo, PT, DPT