File
Kilpeläinen AT1, Kauranen K1
1Saimaa University of Applied Sciences, Health and Social Care, Lappeenranta, Finland
Background: Despite a comprehensive ergonomic education during physiotherapy studies, the backs of physiotherapists are under high workload in daily work e.g. during patient transfer and the facilitation of movements. Lifting done with uneconomical or repetitive movements may exceed the load threshold of the musculoskeletal components of the back, and this overuse may lead to diseases of back structures or, at least, increase the risk of such problems. It is important to study back movements during the transfers to understand the nature of the stresses.
Purpose: To study movements and the angles of the physiotherapists' backs during facilitation of patient movements using a movement analysis suit in real working environments, and to bring more knowledge to biomechanics and workload on the back.
Methods: The participants in the study were six volunteer physiotherapists at the Saimaa University of Applied Sciences. The monitored back spots were the segments of the vertebra between T8-T9, T12-L1, L3-L4 and L5-S1. The movements of the segments were measured with a XSENS® motion analysis system (wearable suit with 17 sensors including accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer) during patient (height: 182 cm, weight: 85 kg and body mass index: 25,7 kg/m2) facilitation from supine position (height of the bed: 63 cm) to standing position. The reported parameters were the movement of center of mass and angles between the vertebras in flexion direction. Mean values and standard deviations were calculated and presented.
Results: The largest lower back movements of the physiotherapists were observed during the facilitation of the patient from side lying to sitting position. In this phase of facilitation, the center of mass moved 11 (9-13) cm, [mean, (range)] forward, and this caused 3o (2-4o) increase in flexion angle in T8-T9 segment, 4,5o (3-5o) increase in T12-L1 segment, 4,5o (3-5o) increase in L3-L4 segment and 10o (6-12o) increase in L5-S1 segment compared to a straight standing position.
Conclusion(s): The results showed that flexion angles of the back were the highest during facilitation of patient from side lying to sitting position in every monitored segment, so this phase of facilitation strains the physiotherapists' lower back the most. This was a pilot study to check the feasibility of the measurement method for ergonomic studies, and the suggestion for future studies would be to repeat the study in a larger study group and to compare lifting techniques with other physiotherapists.
Implications: The results of the project can be utilized in lowering the workload on the back during facilitation of transfers and in the prevention of lower back problems of physiotherapists. In addition, the real time feedback and the movements of avatar on the computer screen can be applied to educate lifting techniques and better ergonomics of the individual worker. Furthermore, before current measuring devices, the exact measuring of movements of different back parts in real working environments has been difficult and laborious to achieve. Nowadays, it is possible and it provides a new viewpoint to the biomechanical study of the back. These are important pieces of information in the battle against back injuries.
Keywords: motion analysis, ergonomics, prevention
Funding acknowledgements: The work was unfunded.
Purpose: To study movements and the angles of the physiotherapists' backs during facilitation of patient movements using a movement analysis suit in real working environments, and to bring more knowledge to biomechanics and workload on the back.
Methods: The participants in the study were six volunteer physiotherapists at the Saimaa University of Applied Sciences. The monitored back spots were the segments of the vertebra between T8-T9, T12-L1, L3-L4 and L5-S1. The movements of the segments were measured with a XSENS® motion analysis system (wearable suit with 17 sensors including accelerometer, gyroscope and magnetometer) during patient (height: 182 cm, weight: 85 kg and body mass index: 25,7 kg/m2) facilitation from supine position (height of the bed: 63 cm) to standing position. The reported parameters were the movement of center of mass and angles between the vertebras in flexion direction. Mean values and standard deviations were calculated and presented.
Results: The largest lower back movements of the physiotherapists were observed during the facilitation of the patient from side lying to sitting position. In this phase of facilitation, the center of mass moved 11 (9-13) cm, [mean, (range)] forward, and this caused 3o (2-4o) increase in flexion angle in T8-T9 segment, 4,5o (3-5o) increase in T12-L1 segment, 4,5o (3-5o) increase in L3-L4 segment and 10o (6-12o) increase in L5-S1 segment compared to a straight standing position.
Conclusion(s): The results showed that flexion angles of the back were the highest during facilitation of patient from side lying to sitting position in every monitored segment, so this phase of facilitation strains the physiotherapists' lower back the most. This was a pilot study to check the feasibility of the measurement method for ergonomic studies, and the suggestion for future studies would be to repeat the study in a larger study group and to compare lifting techniques with other physiotherapists.
Implications: The results of the project can be utilized in lowering the workload on the back during facilitation of transfers and in the prevention of lower back problems of physiotherapists. In addition, the real time feedback and the movements of avatar on the computer screen can be applied to educate lifting techniques and better ergonomics of the individual worker. Furthermore, before current measuring devices, the exact measuring of movements of different back parts in real working environments has been difficult and laborious to achieve. Nowadays, it is possible and it provides a new viewpoint to the biomechanical study of the back. These are important pieces of information in the battle against back injuries.
Keywords: motion analysis, ergonomics, prevention
Funding acknowledgements: The work was unfunded.
Topic: Occupational health & ergonomics; Human movement analysis; Musculoskeletal: spine
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Saimaa University of Applied Sciences
Ethics committee: ethical Committee of Saimaa University of Applied Sciences
Ethics number: 43255
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
