Wåhlin C.1,2, Öhrn A.3, Kvarnström S.4, Nilsing Strid E.5,6
1Linköping University Hospital, Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Linköping, Sweden, 2Karolinska Institutet, Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research, Institute for Environmental Medicine, Stockholm, Sweden, 3County Council of Östergötland, Center for Healthcare Development, Linköping, Sweden, 4County Council of Östergötland, Linköping, Sweden, 5Region Örebro County, University Healthcare Research Centre, Örebro, Sweden, 6Örebro University, University Health Care Research Center, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro, Sweden
Background: In daily practice, both physiotherapists and ergonomists provide interventions for health care workers (HCWs) being injured at work. Occupational injuries are unfortunately common among HCWs, often resulting in mental and/or musculoskeletal disorders. Reporting of HCWs risk situations and incidents is an important preventive approach to increase safety at work. However, research in this area is lacking.
Purpose: The aim of this retrospective study was to explore registered safety risks and causes of occupational injuries among HCWs, with a particular focus on type of injuries, who get injured and situations they occurred.
Methods: The Patient and Workers Safety Study (PAWSS) was conducted in a County Council in the eastern part of Sweden focusing on patients and HCWs injuries during 2011-2014. Data were retrieved from the incident reporting systems (IRS). This part of the study included HCWs risks and incidents of occupational injuries. Number of employed HCWs were during; 2011=11.725, 2012=11.867, 2013=12.196 and, 2014=12.220.
Results: 2436 injuries were reported among 1702 HCWs. Prevalence of reported incidents was 3.1-3.8%. Majority of the incidents happened at work (80%), the rest while commuting to and home from work. Incidents were categorized in the IRS into four injury severity levels; 3% required treatment and resulted in permanent harm, 13% required treatment but did not result in permanent harm, 59% did not require treatment and, 25% had a risk situation, but caused no reported injury. Nurses and nurse assistants had the highest injury rates, 42% versus 22%. Injury rates among other occupations were; dental personnel 7%, physicians 6%, mental health personnel 6%, physiotherapists/occupational therapists 3% and, 14% among other occupations. Some of the most frequent reported type of injuries were; pain condition (n=643), needle stick and sharps injuries (n= 621) overexertion injuries and falls (n=354), mental illness (n=113), crush and pinch injuries/fractures: (n=190) human bites and scratches (n=65). Incidents causing low back pain were reported among 109 HCWs. The most commonly reported risk situations for injuries were; patient handling and movement, slips, manual lifting and handling incidents, needle stick injuries and crush injuries, heavy physical and mental work load and hazards at work including work place violence.
Conclusion(s): The annual prevalence of safety risks and occupational injuries were about 3% among a Swedish cohort of HCWs. The most frequent occupational risk factors and injuries were due to patient handling, falls, needle stick, crush injuries, heavy work load and hazards at work. The study shows that 16 % of those who got injured at work required treatment.
Implications: Incident reporting systems captures information that provides a learning opportunity, identifying risk factors and injuries for HCWs. Employers are supposed to have an active role in preventing occupational injuries and protecting HCWs from hazardous conditions. We suggest that employers in collaboration with HCWs and the occupational health services discuss how risks are assessed at the work place using a human factor system approach. The goal is to reduce the number of preventable injuries among HCWs. Ergonomic safe patient handling program may be used to reduce frequent occupational injuries.
Funding acknowledgements: This work was funded by; County Council of Östergötland and, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Sweden
Topic: Occupational health & ergonomics
Ethics approval: The study was approved by the Regional Ethical Board at Linköping University, Sweden (Dnr: 2015/330-31).
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
