Documents Barim, Menekse Salar 3 results

"Healthcare providers face numerous challenges in lifting and mobilizing overweight and obese patients, which often lead to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). To address this, hospitals implement safe patient handling and mobility (SPHM) programs, including mechanical lift equipment, policies, and training. This study surveyed 134 healthcare workers in five Veterans Administration Medical Centers who regularly used SPHM programs. According to findings, handling bariatric patients frequently correlated with higher chronic back pain risk. Injuries occurred when not using powered equipment. Improvements like sufficient time with equipment and clear policies reduced injury likelihood. Equipment was crucial in preventing musculoskeletal injuries and pain. Findings emphasize using powered equipment and updating SPHM programs based on worker feedback for better patient handling practices."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

"The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) for lifting provides risk zones for assessing two-handed lifting tasks. This paper describes two computational models for identifying the lifting risk zones using gyroscope information from five inertial measurement units (IMUs) attached to the lifter. Two models were developed: (1) the ratio model using body segment length ratios of the forearm, upper arm, trunk, thigh, and calf segments, and (2) the ratio + length model using actual measurements of the body segments in the ratio model. The models were evaluated using data from 360 lifting trials performed by 10 subjects (5 males and 5 females) with an average age of 51.50 (±9.83) years. The accuracy of the two models was compared against data collected by a laboratory-based motion capture system as a function of 12 ACGIH lifting risk zones and 3 grouped risk zones (low, medium, and high). Results showed that only the ratio + length model provides acceptable estimates of lifting risk with an average of 69% accuracy level for predicting one of the 3 grouped zones and a higher rate of 92% for predicting the high lifting zone."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

"Background
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to estimate the geometric dimensions of lower lumbar vertebrae. While MRI-based measurements have demonstrated good reliability with interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of 0.80 or higher, many evaluations focus solely on the comparison of identical MRI images. This approach primarily reflects analyst dexterity and does not assess the reliability of the entire process, including imaging and image selection.
Objective
To evaluate the inter- and intra-rater reliability of the entire process of using MRI to measure biomechanically relevant lumbar spinal characteristics, incorporating imaging, image selection, and analysis. Methods: A dataset of 144 low-back MRI scans was analyzed. Reliability assessments were performed under different conditions: (1) identical scans rated by the same analyst at different times (intra-rater reliability) and (2) distinct scans of the same subject obtained by different MRI operators and analyzed by different analysts (inter-rater reliability). Mean absolute differences in measurements were calculated, and sources of variability, such as breathing artifacts, were noted.
Results
Larger discrepancies were observed when comparing distinct scans analyzed by different MRI operators and analysts. In the “worst-case” scenario, where both the MRI operator and analyst differed, a 4.05% mean absolute difference was noted for anterior endplate measurements. This was higher than the 2.76% difference observed when analysts re-rated their own scans after one month. Despite these discrepancies, the variability in measurements was relatively low and primarily attributed to factors like breathing artifacts.
Conclusion
The process of using MRI to derive biomechanical measures, particularly for bony structures, demonstrates robust reliability. Variability in measurements is minimal even under challenging conditions, supporting the use of MRI for biomechanical assessments."

This work is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).