Search results for: concurrent scheduling

Authors: Tianqiao Zhang, Ye Tian, Yanliang Yin, Yichao Tian, Suzhai Tian, Weige Sun, Shuhui Gong, Limei Tang, Ruoliang Tang

Abstract:

Introduction: Healthcare workers, especially the nurses all over the world, are highly vulnerable to work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMSDs), experiencing high rates of neck, shoulder, and low back injuries, due to the unfavorable working conditions. To reduce WMSDs among nursing personnel, many workplace interventions have been developed and implemented. Unfortunately, the ongoing Covid-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic has posed great challenges to the ergonomic practices and interventions in healthcare facilities, particularly the hospitals, since current Covid-19 mitigation measures, such as social distancing and working remotely, has substantially minimized in-person gatherings and trainings. On the other hand, hospitals throughout the world have been short-staffed, resulting in disturbance of shift scheduling and more importantly, the increased job demand among the available caregivers, particularly the doctors and nurses. With the latest development in communication technology, remote intervention measures have been developed as an alternative, without the necessity of in-person meetings. The Omaha System (OS) is a standardized classification system for nursing practices, including a problem classification system, an intervention system, and an outcome evaluation system. This paper describes the development of an OS-based ergonomic intervention program. Methods: First, a comprehensive literature search was performed among worldwide electronic databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), between journal inception to May 2020, resulting in a total of 1,418 scientific articles. After two independent screening processes, the final knowledge pool included eleven randomized controlled trial studies to develop the draft of the intervention program with Omaha intervention subsystem as the framework. After the determination of sample size needed for statistical power and the potential loss to follow-up, a total of 94 nurses from eight clinical departments agreed to provide written, informed consent to participate in the study, which were subsequently assigned into two random groups (i.e., intervention vs. control). A subgroup of twelve nurses were randomly selected to participate in a semi-structured interview, during which their general understanding and awareness of musculoskeletal disorders and potential interventions was assessed. Then, the first draft was modified to reflect the findings from these interviews. Meanwhile, the tentative program schedule was also assessed. Next, two rounds of consultation were conducted among experts in nursing management, occupational health, psychology, and rehabilitation, to further adjust and finalize the intervention program. The control group had access to all the information and exercise modules at baseline, while an interdisciplinary research team was formed and supervised the implementation of the on-line intervention program through multiple social media groups. Outcome measures of this comparative study included biomechanical load assessed by the Quick Exposure Check and stresses due to awkward body postures. Results and Discussion: Modification to the draft included (1) supplementing traditional Chinese medicine practices, (2) adding the use of assistive patient handling equipment, and (3) revising the on-line training method. Information module should be once a week, lasting about 20 to 30 minutes, for a total of 6 weeks, while the exercise module should be 5 times a week, each lasting about 15 to 20 minutes, for a total of 6 weeks.

Keywords: ergonomic interventions, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs), omaha system, nurses, Covid-19

Procedia PDF Downloads 141

Authors: Julie M. Novak, Simone K. Brennan, Lacey Brim

Abstract:

Undergraduate medical education (UME) curriculum notably addresses micro-level communications (e.g., patient-provider, intercultural, inter-professional), yet frequently under-examines the role and impact of organizational communication, a more macro-level. Organizational communication, however, functions as foundation and through systemic structures of an organization and thereby serves as hidden curriculum and influences learning experiences and outcomes. Yet, little available research exists fully examining how students experience organizational communication while in medical school. Extant literature and best practices provide insufficient guidance for UME programs, in particular. The purpose of this study was to map and examine current organizational communication systems and processes in a UME program. Employing a phenomenology-grounded and participatory approach, this study sought to understand the organizational communication system from medical students' perspective. The research team consisted of a core team and 13 medical student co-investigators. This research employed multiple methods, including focus groups, individual interviews, and two surveys (one reflective of focus group questions, the other requesting students to submit ‘examples’ of communications). To provide context for student responses, nonstudent participants (faculty, administrators, and staff) were sampled, as they too express concerns about communication. Over 400 students across all cohorts and 17 nonstudents participated. Data were iteratively analyzed and checked for triangulation. Findings reveal the complex nature of organizational communication and student-oriented communications. They reveal program-impactful strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and tensions and speak to the role of organizational communication practices influencing both climate and culture. With regard to communications, students receive multiple, simultaneous communications from multiple sources/channels, both formal (e.g., official email) and informal (e.g., social media). Students identified organizational strengths including the desire to improve student voice, and message frequency. They also identified weaknesses related to over-reliance on emails, numerous platforms with inconsistent utilization, incorrect information, insufficient transparency, assessment/input fatigue, tacit expectations, scheduling/deadlines, responsiveness, and mental health confidentiality concerns. Moreover, they noted gaps related to lack of coordination/organization, ambiguous point-persons, student ‘voice-only’, open communication loops, lack of core centralization and consistency, and mental health bridges. Findings also revealed organizational identity and cultural characteristics as impactful on the medical school experience. Cultural characteristics included program size, diversity, urban setting, student organizations, community-engagement, crisis framing, learning for exams, inefficient bureaucracy, and professionalism. Moreover, they identified system structures that do not always leverage cultural strengths or reduce cultural problematics. Based on the results, opportunities for productive change are identified. These include leadership visibly supporting and enacting overall organizational narratives, making greater efforts in consistently ‘closing the loop’, regularly sharing how student input effects change, employing strategies of crisis communication more often, strengthening communication infrastructure, ensuring structures facilitate effective operations and change efforts, and highlighting change efforts in informational communication. Organizational communication and communications are not soft-skills, or of secondary concern within organizations, rather they are foundational in nature and serve to educate/inform all stakeholders. As primary stakeholders, students and their success directly affect the accomplishment of organizational goals. This study demonstrates how inquiries about how students navigate their educational experience extends research-based knowledge and provides actionable knowledge for the improvement of organizational operations in UME.

Keywords: medical education programs, organizational communication, participatory research, qualitative mixed methods

Procedia PDF Downloads 95