15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Intensification of modern swine production has led to many new technologies, including needleless injectors. Although needleless injectors may increase productivity (by reducing injection time) and reduce needlestick injuries, the effect on risk for musculoskeletal disorders is not clear. This project will compare conventional needles with needleless injectors in terms of cost, productivity, injury rates, biomechanical exposures, and worker preference. Muscle activity (EMG) and hand/wrist posture will be measured on swine workers performing injection tasks with both injection methods. Video recordings during the exposure assessments will compare the duration and productivity for each injection method using time-and-motion methods. Injury claim data from up to 60 pig barns will be analyzed for needlestick and musculoskeletal injuries before/after needleless injector adoption. Workers and managers will be asked about what they like and dislike about each method and what helps and hinders successful implementation. The information above will be input into a cost-benefit model to determine the incremental effects of needleless injectors in terms of occupational health, worker preference, and the financial “bottom line” of the farm. Findings will be relevant to the swine industry and are intended to be transferable to other new technologies in animal production.

          Related collections

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Work-related musculoskeletal disorders: the epidemiologic evidence and the debate.

          The debate about work-relatedness of musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) reflects both confusion about epidemiologic principles and gaps in the scientific literature. The physical ergonomic features of work frequently cited as risk factors for MSDs include rapid work pace and repetitive motion, forceful exertions, non-neutral body postures, and vibration. However, some still dispute the importance of these factors, especially relative to non-occupational causes. This paper addresses the controversy with reference to a major report recently commissioned by the US Congress from the National Research Council (NRC) and Institute of Medicine (IOM) (2001). The available epidemiologic evidence is substantial, but will benefit from more longitudinal data to better evaluate gaps in knowledge concerning latency of effect, natural history, prognosis, and potential for selection bias in the form of the healthy worker effect. While objective measures may be especially useful in establishing a more secure diagnosis, subjective measures better capture patient impact. Examination techniques still do not exist that can serve as a "gold standard" for many of the symptoms that are commonly reported in workplace studies. Finally, exposure assessment has too often been limited to crude indicators, such as job title. Worker self-report, investigator observation, and direct measurement each add to understanding but the lack of standardized exposure metrics limits ability to compare findings among studies. Despite these challenges, the epidemiologic literature on work-related MSDs-in combination with extensive laboratory evidence of pathomechanisms related to work stressors-is convincing to most. The NRC/IOM report concluded, and other reviewers internationally have concurred, that the etiologic importance of occupational ergonomic stressors for the occurrence of MSDs of the low back and upper extremities has been demonstrated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Model Assisted Survey Sampling

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Making public health programs last: conceptualizing sustainability

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Biomed Res Int
                Biomed Res Int
                BMRI
                BioMed Research International
                Hindawi
                2314-6133
                2314-6141
                2017
                29 October 2017
                : 2017
                : 5094509
                Affiliations
                1Canadian Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 104 Clinic Place, P.O. Box 23, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 2Z4
                2School of Physical Therapy, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Suite 3400, 104 Clinic Place, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 2Z4
                3School of Physical and Health Education, Nipissing University, 100 College Drive, Box 5002, North Bay, ON, Canada P1B 8L7
                4Prairie Swine Centre Inc., 2105-8th St. East, P.O. Box 21057, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7H 5N9
                5Department of Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 103 Hospital Drive, Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 0W8
                Author notes

                Academic Editor: Tessa Keegel

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8495-7402
                Article
                10.1155/2017/5094509
                5682043
                2cfcf9e7-44a8-47d7-a738-26407ba5a288
                Copyright © 2017 Catherine Trask et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 24 May 2017
                : 24 September 2017
                Funding
                Funded by: Workers Compensation Board of Manitoba
                Categories
                Research Article

                Comments

                Comment on this article