Search results for: Pinal Patel

Authors: Salima Bijapuri, Shweta Bhatbolan, Sejalben Patel

Abstract:

Ergonomics concerns the fitting of the environment and the equipment to the worker. Ergonomic principles can be employed in different dimensions of the industrial sector. Participation of all the stakeholders is the key to the formulation of a multifaceted and comprehensive approach to lessen the burden of occupational hazards. Taking responsibility for one’s own work activities by acquiring sufficient knowledge and potential to influence the practices and outcomes is the basis of participatory ergonomics and even hastens the process to identify workplace hazards. The study was aimed to check how participatory ergonomics can be effective in the management of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Method: A mega kitchen was identified in a twin city of Karnataka, India. Consent was taken, and the screening of workers was done using observation methods. Kitchen work was structured to include different tasks, which included preparation, cooking, distributing, and serving food, packing food to be delivered to schools, dishwashing, cleaning and maintenance of kitchen and equipment, and receiving and storing raw material. Total 100 workers attended the education session on participatory ergonomics and its role in implementing the correct ergonomic practices, thus preventing WRMSDs. Demographic details and baseline data on related musculoskeletal pain and discomfort were collected using the Nordic pain questionnaire and VAS score pre- and post-study. Monthly visits were made, and the education sessions were reiterated on each visit, thus reminding, correcting, and problem-solving of each worker. After 9 months with a total of 4 such education session, the post education data was collected. The software SPSS 20 was used to analyse the collected data. Results: The majority of them (78%), depending on the availability and feasibility, participated in the intervention workshops were arranged four times. The average age of the participants was 39 years. The percentage of female participants was 79.49%, and 20.51% of participants comprised of males. The Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire (NMQ) showed that knee pain was the most commonly reported complaint (62%) from the last 12 months with a mean VAS of 6.27, followed by low back pain. Post intervention, the mean VAS Score was reduced significantly to 2.38. The comparison of pre-post scores was made using Wilcoxon matched pairs test. Upon enquiring, it was found that, the participants learned the importance of applying ergonomics at their workplace which inturn was beneficial for them to handle any problems arising at their workplace on their own with self confidence. Conclusion: The participatory ergonomics proved effective with workers of mega kitchen, and it is a feasible and practical approach. The advantage of the given study area was that it had a sophisticated and ergonomically designed workstation; thus it was the lack of education and practical knowledge to use these stations was of utmost need. There was a significant reduction in VAS scores with the implementation of changes in the working style, and the knowledge of ergonomics helped to decrease physical load and improve musculoskeletal health.

Keywords: ergonomic awareness session, mega kitchen, participatory ergonomics, work related musculoskeletal disorders

Procedia PDF Downloads 138

Authors: Palak V. Patel, Jessica Pixley, Steven R. Feldman

Abstract:

Introduction: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common skin cancer worldwide and requires substantial resources to treat. When choosing between indicated therapies, providers consider their associated adverse effects, efficacy, cosmesis, and function preservation. The patient’s tumor burden, infiltrative risk, and risk of tumor recurrence are also considered. Treatment cost is often left out of these discussions. This can lead to financial toxicity, which describes the harm and quality of life reductions inflicted by high care costs. Methods: We studied the guidelines set forth by the American Academy of Dermatology for the treatment of BCC. A PubMed literature search was conducted to identify the costs of each recommended therapy. We discuss costs alongside treatment efficacy and side-effect profile. Results: Surgical treatment for BCC can be cost-effective if the appropriate treatment is selected for the presenting tumor. Curettage and electrodesiccation can be used in low-grade, low-recurrence tumors in aesthetically unimportant areas. The benefits of cost-conscious care are not likely to be outweighed by the risks of poor cosmesis or tumor return ($471 BCC of the cheek). When tumor burden is limited, MMS offers better cure rates and lower recurrence rates than surgical excision, and with comparable costs (MMS $1263; SE $949). Surgical excision with permanent sections may be indicated when tumor burden is more extensive or if molecular testing is necessary. The utility of surgical excision with frozen sections, which costs substantially more than MMS without comparable outcomes, is less clear (SE with frozen sections $2334-$3085). Less data exists on non-surgical treatments for BCC. These techniques cost less, but recurrence-risk is high. Side-effects of nonsurgical treatment are limited to local skin reactions, and cosmesis is good. Cryotherapy, 5-FU, and MAL-PDT are all more affordable than surgery, but high recurrence rates increase risk of secondary financial and psychosocial burden (recurrence rates 21-39%; cost $100-270). Radiation therapy offers better clearance rates than other nonsurgical treatments but is associated with similar recurrence rates and a significantly larger financial burden ($2591-$3460 BCC of the cheek). Treatments for advanced or metastatic BCC are extremely costly, but few patients require their use, and the societal cost burden remains low. Vismodegib and sonidegib have good response rates but substantial side effects, and therapy should be combined with multidisciplinary care and palliative measures. Expert-review has found sonidegib to be the less expensive and more efficacious option (vismodegib $128,358; sonidegib $122,579). Platinum therapy, while not FDA-approved, is also effective but expensive (~91,435). Immunotherapy offers a new line of treatment in patients intolerant of hedgehog inhibitors ($683,061). Conclusion: Dermatologists working within resource-compressed practices and with resource-limited patients must prudently manage the healthcare dollar. Surgical therapies for BCC offer the lowest risk of recurrence at the most reasonable cost. Non-surgical therapies are more affordable, but high recurrence rates increase the risk of secondary financial and psychosocial burdens. Treatments for advanced BCC are incredibly costly, but the low incidence means the overall cost to the system is low.

Keywords: nonmelanoma skin cancer, basal cell skin cancer, squamous cell skin cancer, cost of care

Procedia PDF Downloads 124

Authors: Jerome Dalphinis, Vishal Patel

Abstract:

The Bailiwick of Jersey is an island British crown dependency situated off the coast of France. Jersey General Hospital’s emergency department sees approximately 40,000 patients a year. It’s outside the NHS, with secondary care being free at the point of care. Sedation is a continuum which extends from a normal conscious level to being fully unresponsive. Procedural sedation produces a minimally depressed level of consciousness in which the patient retains the ability to maintain an airway, and they respond appropriately to physical stimulation. The goals of it are to improve patient comfort and tolerance of the procedure and alleviate associated anxiety. Indications can be stratified by acuity, emergency (cardioversion for life-threatening dysrhythmia), and urgency (joint reduction). In the emergency department, this is most often achieved using a combination of opioids and benzodiazepines. Some departments also use ketamine to produce dissociative sedation, a cataleptic state of profound analgesia and amnesia. The response to pharmacological agents is highly individual, and the drugs used occasionally have unpredictable pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, which can always result in progression between levels of sedation irrespective of the intention. Therefore, practitioners must be able to ‘rescue’ patients from deeper sedation. These practitioners need to be senior clinicians with advanced airway skills (AAS) training. It can lead to adverse effects such as dangerous hypoxia and unintended loss of consciousness if incorrectly undertaken; studies by the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD) have reported avoidable deaths. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine, UK (RCEM) released an updated ‘Safe Sedation of Adults in the Emergency Department’ guidance in 2017 detailing a series of standards for staff competencies, and the required environment and equipment, which are required for each target sedation depth. The emergency department in Jersey undertook audit research in 2018 to assess their current practice. It showed gaps in clinical competency, the need for uniform care, and improved documentation. This spurred the development of a checklist incorporating the above RCEM standards, including contraindication for procedural sedation and difficult airway assessment. This was approved following discussion with the relevant heads of departments and the patient safety directorates. Following this, a second audit research was carried out in 2019 with 17 completed checklists (11 relocation of joints, 6 cardioversions). Data was obtained from looking at the controlled resuscitation drugs book containing documented use of ketamine, alfentanil, and fentanyl. TrakCare, which is the patient electronic record system, was then referenced to obtain further information. The results showed dramatic improvement compared to 2018, and they have been subdivided into six categories; pre-procedure assessment recording of significant medical history and ASA grade (2 fold increase), informed consent (100% documentation), pre-oxygenation (88%), staff (90% were AAS practitioners) and monitoring (92% use of non-invasive blood pressure, pulse oximetry, capnography, and cardiac rhythm monitoring) during procedure, and discharge instructions including the documented return of normal vitals and consciousness (82%). This procedural sedation checklist is a safe intervention that identifies pertinent information about the patient and provides a standardised checklist for the delivery of gold standard of care.

Keywords: advanced airway skills, checklist, procedural sedation, resuscitation

Procedia PDF Downloads 117