Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Back Injuries”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1994

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of employer-issued back belts in areas of high risk for back injury.

Back belts have gained popularity under the assumption that their use will reduce low back injuries and thereby decrease the costs. This study sought to examine that hypothesis. A retrospective survey instrument was administered to 1316 workers who perform lifting activities at Tinker Air Force Base, Midwest City, Oklahoma, to identify belt use, lifting requirements, injury, and treatment history. Analysis was also performed on costs applicable to providing the belts, treatment of injury, and lost or limited duty work days. Results show an odds ratio of 1.01 (confidence interval 1.01, 1.02) and P value of .0005 of low back injury with the number and weight of lifts performed in an 8-hour period as well as an odds ratio of 5.56 (confidence interval 3.35, 9.26) with prior history of injury. A protective effect, odds ratio of .65, P value of .019 is noted between lifting and attendance at a back training program. Use of a back belt appears to be marginally effective (odds ratio .60, P value .0508) in reducing injuries when controlling for other related factors. Cost analysis over all diagnoses of low back injury shows less intensive treatment and lower cost per injury for workers injured without a belt versus those injured while wearing a belt. It appears that predictors of low back injury are those expected based on risk assumed (amount of time spent performing lifts, history of injury) and that training programs are effective in prevention of problems. Data suggest that back belts appear to be minimally effective in preventing injury.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Close calls for low-back injuries.

Back injuries are a major hazard in the workplace, particularly in the nursing profession. In acute care in Alberta, nursing personnel account for almost 50 per cent of all lost-time claims per year. In extended care facilities, nursing personnel account for 60 per cent of lost-time claims. The source of injury is often another person (64%), the incident is often lifting or over-exertion (65%), and the injury is most often a sprain or strain (75%). Furthermore, 50 per cent of lost-time injuries are to the back. Clearly, back strains while handling clients are a major hazard in the health care industry.

Alberta↗
PubMed1989

Patient-handling skill, back injuries, and back pain. An intervention study in nursing.

The aim of this intervention was to evaluate the effect of training on patient-handling skills and prospectively to assess the effect of skill on subsequent back pain and back injuries in nursing. Of a total of 255 nurses, 199 were assessed for their skill in patient-handling. One-half (control group) received traditional training in patient-handling, and the other half (trained group) received a curriculum of instruction totaling 40 hours. The skills of both groups were assessed on graduation. The control group was rated as less competent in patient-handling. Nurses in both groups were questioned about the prevalence of back pain and incidence of back injuries in the first year after graduation. In multiple regression analysis, the major risk indicators for back injuries were poor patient-handling skill, low numbers of repetitions in the sit-up test, and high work-load scores. High score on the hysteria scale of Middlesex Hospital Questionnaire was a risk indicator for all kinds of back pain. Though back pain was independent of patient-handling skill, those rated as "bad" or "poor" had more back injuries (24%) than those who had been rated as "good" or "excellent" (2%) (P less than 0.001), but the difference between the trained and control groups was not statistically significant. It was concluded that back injuries may be prevented by the teaching of patient-handling skills.

Back Injuries↗
PubMedDate not supplied

A history of low back injury is a risk factor for recurrent back injuries in varsity athletes.

In this prospective study, we investigated whether a history of previous low back injury and dissatisfaction with a coach and teammates could predict future low back injury in varsity athletes during a 1-year follow-up period. Of 679 Yale varsity athletes surveyed in 1999, 18.3% (124) reported that they had sustained a low back injury within the past 5 years, and 6.8% (46) sustained a low back injury in the follow-up season. There were no differences in incidence rates between men and women or between athletes involved in contact or noncontact sports. A history of low back injury was the significant predictor for sustaining low back injury in the following year, and athletes who reported previous low back injury were at three times greater risk. Athletes who still had pain at the time of the survey were six times more likely to sustain a low back injury than were athletes without a history of low back injury. These results suggest that some risk factors associated with a history of low back injury predispose athletes to sustain recurrent injury. They may be congenital or a result of insufficient recovery time after the first low back injury episode.

Adult↗
PubMed1990

The role of exercise and posture in preventing low back injury.

Low back injury is a serious problem for U.S. industries, accounting for as much as one third of all workers' compensation payments. The number of low back injuries can be reduced effectively through the stressing of proper posture and the use of back care exercises. Body posture that maintains the spine's three natural curves decreases intradiscal stress. Back care exercises decrease the likelihood of low back injury by strengthening and adding flexibility to the spine's supportive structures.

Back Pain↗
PubMed1995

Low back injury.

Low back injuries occur commonly in tennis, but the pathophysiologic, biomechanical, and clinical characteristics are not well defined. Tennis players may be at an increased risk of lumbar disc pathology from rotational and hyperextension shearing effects. Treatment of low back injury at present is empiric, but sport-specific lumbar stabilization and unloading of the lumbar disc should be developed. Prospective longitudinal research protocols are needed to study the lumbar spine in tennis players.

Biomechanical Phenomena↗
PubMed1992

The value of preemployment roentgenographs for predicting acute back injury claims and chronic back pain disability.

Preemployment roentgenographs have long been used in industry to screen job applicants. Roentgenographs have had little effect, however, in curbing the cost of back problems in industry. This study evaluates the capabilities of preemployment roentgenographs for predicting acute back injury claims within the longshoring industry and for predicting back problems that lead to back disability of more than six months. The data indicate that lumbosacral roentgenographs are not helpful in predicting who is more likely to make a back injury claim, or those few who make up the vast majority of the costs for industrial back pain by becoming disabled for more than six months. Lumbosacral roentgenographs have little link to back disorders and may be viewed as discriminatory. The radiation exposure is not justified by their predictive value as a preemployment screening tool.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed1996

Factors affecting first return to work following a compensable occupational back injury.

Occupational back injuries produced $27 billion in direct and indirect costs in 1988. Predictors of prolonged disability have generally been identified in selected clinical populations, but there have been few population-based studies using statewide registries from workers' compensation systems. This study uses a 1986 cohort of 8,628 Michigan workers with compensable back injuries followed to March 1, 1990. Cox proportional hazards analyses with nine categorical covariates identified factors predicting missed worktime for the first disability episode following the injury. The model distinguished factors affecting the acute (< or = 8 weeks) and chronic disability periods (> 8 weeks). The first disability episode following injury contains 69.6% of the missed worktime observed through follow-up. In the acute phase, which contributes 15.2% of first episode missed worktime, gender, age, number of dependents, industry (construction), occupation, and type of accident predict continued work disability. Marital status, weekly wage compensation rate, and establishment size do not. Beyond 8 weeks, age, establishment size and, to a lesser degree, wage compensation rate predict duration of work disability. Graphs show the predicted disability course for injured workers with specific covariate patterns. Future efforts to reduce missed worktime may require modifications in current clinical practice by patient age group and the development of new strategies to encourage small and medium-size employers to find ways to return their injured employees to work sooner. Recent federal statutes covering disabled workers will only partially correct the strong effect of employer establishment size.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Reduction of Acute Low Back Injuries by Use of Back Supports.

The objective of this study was to determine the effect of a change in back-support-use policy on the occurrence of work-related low back injuries among a large cohort of employees in the retail-trade home improvement industry. Working hours of exposure, back support use, and intensity of materials-lifting requirements were collected from 1989 through 1994. Records of injury-related claims were reviewed for all documented injuries to the lower back among members of the cohort during the same period. Over 101,000,000 working hours were recorded by nearly 36,000 employees; 2,152 employees reported an acute low back injury occurring during working hours as a first report of episode, with medical-physician diagnosis and acute/abrupt onset. Incidence density rates were calculated for persons wearing and not wearing the back support. Rate ratios and prevented fractions were evaluated. Before implementation of a company-wide back-support policy, the employees had a rate of acute low back injuries of 30.6 per million working hours. After implementation, this rate fell to 20.2 per million working hours, a significant reduction of 34.0%. This effect was seen in both genders, in younger workers and in those aged 55+, with low levels of lifting as well as high lifting intensities, and in persons with one to two years of employment with the company. The authors conclude that uniform mandatory implementation of a back-support-use policy significantly reduces the incidence of acute low back injuries incurred in the workplace.

Journal Article↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Back supports and back injuries: a second visit with the Home Depot cohort study data on low-back injuries.

The back support has been controversial as a means of reducing injuries to the lower back. Diverse issues bear on the interpretation of data obtained in a major epidemiologic investigation of the utility of back supports in the retail-trade home improvement industry. These concerns are focused on alternate explanations for the changes in injury rates observed over the six-year study period, on individual and group factors other than the use of the back support that might have contributed to reducing the risk of injury, and on related methodologic issues. Each issue is addressed with specific reference to how it might affect the analyses and the conclusion that the supports showed a protective effect.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Preventing back injury among nurses.

Back injury and subsequent back pain are highly prevalent in nursing. This article explores multidimensional factors with respect to working behaviors, physical fitness, and environments that contribute to both acute and cumulative back injuries to nursing staff. Specific interventions to reduce the risk for back injury are examined. The practice of proper posture, body mechanics, and lifting techniques are reviewed. Exercises to increase flexibility, muscle strength, and endurance are encouraged to reduce the gap between job physical demands and human capabilities. Nurses are also encouraged to be knowledgeable about ergonomic principles and to be active in identifying and using these principles. Research needs and approaches to the study of the back injury problem of nurses are also suggested.

Back Pain↗
PubMed1997

A controlled trial of an educational program to prevent low back injuries.

BACKGROUND: Low back injuries are common and costly, accounting for 15 to 25 percent of injuries covered by workers' compensation and 30 to 40 percent of the payments made under that program. The high costs of injury, the lack of effective treatment. and the evidence that there are behavioral risk factors have led to widespread use of employee education programs that teach safe lifting and handling. The effectiveness of those programs, however, has received little rigorous evaluation. METHODS: We evaluated an educational program designed to prevent low back injury in a randomized, controlled trial involving about 4000 postal workers. The program, similar to that in wide use in so-called back schools, was taught by experienced physical therapists. Work units of workers and supervisors were trained in a two-session back school (three hours of training), followed by three to four reinforcement sessions over the succeeding few years. Injured subjects (from both the intervention and the control groups) were randomized a second time to receive either training or no training after their return to work. RESULTS: Physical therapists trained 2534 postal workers and 134 supervisors. Over 5.5 years of follow-up, 360 workers reported low back injuries, for a rate of 21.2 injuries per 1000 worker-years of risk. The median time off from work per injury was 14 days (range, 0 to 1717); the median cost was $204 (range, zero to $190,380). After their return to work, 75 workers were injured again. Our comparison of the intervention and control groups found that the education program did not reduce the rate of low back injury, the median cost per injury, the time off from work per injury, the rate of related musculoskeletal injuries, or the rate of repeated injury after return to work; only the subjects' knowledge of safe behavior was increased by the training. CONCLUSIONS: A large-scale, randomized, controlled trial of an educational program to prevent work-associated low back injury found no long-term benefits associated with training.

Adolescent↗