design considerations for safe patient handling in healthcare facilities
DESCRIPTION
Kirstyn Albrecht Safe Handling Advisor, Counties Manukau District Health Board (P29, Friday, NZI 5 Room, 2-2.30)TRANSCRIPT
Kirstyn AlbrechtPhysiotherapist, Safe Handling Advisor
Counties Manukau District Health BoardAuckland, New Zealand
Design Considerations for Safe Patient Handling in
Healthcare Facilities
Overview
CMDHB Clinical Services Building (CSB) Patient Handling Needs Considerations
Equipment Dimensional Process
Overcoming Challenges Learnings &
Recommendations
Clinical Services Building (CSB)
Patient Care Area Beds (117)
Theatres 14
Recovery Unit 23
Theatre Admission and Discharge Unit 20
Short Stay Assessment & Planning Unit 42
High Dependency Unit 18
Other Services
Sterile Supply Unit
Support Services
Design Phases
Concept Design Preliminary Design: Meetings
– Architects– Project Managers: CMDHB and External– Clinicians and Physicians– CMDHB Service Improvement Managers– Other stakeholders eg OH&S, Infection control, Engineering
Develop Design: More meetings… Detailed Design: Meetings & more meetings… Construction
Design Risk Risk: Design and build a clinical environment that doesn’t
support safe moving and handling practice– Patient Moving and Handling challenges for the lifetime of the facility
Copyright CMDHB 2011
Impact of poor ergonomic design Clinical time Injury
27% Patient Handling, 20% Manual HandlingCMDHB Injury Claims Data 2003-2011
Cost Quality of care Model of care and practice
57% of staff sometimes, infrequently or never have sufficient space in room to safely use equipment
CMDHB Staff Survey November 2011
Patient Handling Needs Analysis
Patients Medical condition Physical characteristics Mobility level
Moving and Handling Tasks High risk activities and scenarios
Environment Space in room Other equipment and Storage
CMDHB Adapted ToolConcise Patient Ceiling Track Needs Assessment Tool for CMDHB – October 2011 Adapted for CMDHB use from: Patient Care Ergonomics Resource Guide: Safe Patient Handling & Movement, Department of Veterans Affairs (October 2001)
1) Patient Physical Characteristics and Dependency Levels
a. Describe the patients/residents on your unit. b. Describe their level of cognitive participation.
c. Average Unit population characteristics (# hospice beds, Alzheimer beds, TBI beds,
etc.) and variability in this.
d. Discuss proposed changes in the average daily census over the next two years.
e. Identify typical distribution of patients by physical dependency level according to the definitions below. (Base on PHYSICAL LIMITATIONS not on clinical acuity)
Note: This is not the same as patient acuity. The total for the 5 categories should equal your average daily census.
____ Total Dependence – Cannot help at all with transfers, full staff assistance for activity during entire seven-day period. Requires total transfer at all times.
____ Extensive Assistance – Can perform part of activity, usually can follow simple directions, may require tactile cueing, can bear some weight, sit up with assistance, has some upper body strength, or may be able to pivot transfer. Over the last seven-day period, help provided three or more times for weight-bearing transfers or may have required a total transfer.
____ Limited Assistance – Highly involved in activity, able to pivot transfer and has considerable upper body strength and bears some weight on legs. Can sit up well, but may need some assistance. Guided maneuvering of limbs or other non-weight bearing assistance three or more times, or help provided one or two times during the last seven days.
____ Supervision – Oversight, encouragement, or cueing provided three or more times during the last seven days or physical assistance provided only one or two times during the last seven days.
____ Independent – Can ambulate normally without assistance in unusual situations may need some limited assistance. Help or oversight may have been provided only one or two times in the last seven days.
Total Number of Patients on Unit: ____
f. Indicate the weight range of patients on your unit. g. Indicate the number of patients over 137kg. h. Indicate the number of patients over 200kg.
2) Tool for Prioritizing High-Risk Patient Handling Tasks
Directions: For each task, consider the frequency of the task (high, moderate, low) and musculoskeletal stress (high, moderate, low) of each task. Cross out tasks not typically performed on your unit. Assign a rank (from 1 to 10) to the tasks you consider to be the highest risk tasks contributing to musculoskeletal injuries for persons providing direct patient care. A “10” should represent the highest risk, “9” for the second highest, etc.
TASK
FREQUENCY
H= high
M= moderate
L= low
STRESS OF Task
H= high
M= moderate
L= low
RANK
10= high-risk
1= low risk
PATIENT HANDLING TASKS
Transferring a patient: (includes reverse activity)
From bed to wheelchair or shower/commode chair
From bed to chair/arm chair
From wheelchair or shower/commode to toilet
From bed to stretcher/bed
Moving a patient:
Lifting patient to the head of the bed
Repositioning patient in bed from side to side
Repositioning patient in chair or wheelchair
Lifting a patient up from the floor
Weighing a patient
Bathing a patient:
In bed
In a shower chair
On a shower trolley or stretcher
Other handling activities
Undressing/dressing a patient
Applying antiembolism stockings
Making an occupied bed
Feeding bed-ridden patient
Changing absorbent pad
Transporting patient off unit
Other Task:
Adapted from Owen, B.D. & Garg, A. (1991). AAOHN Journal, 39, (1).
What and How Much Equipment
Floor hoists - 1 hoist to 10 patients
Sit to Stand - 1 hoist to 10 patients
Other Equipment - PAT slides, Sliding Sheets, Handling Belts
Ceiling Hoist Coverage – Limited information available– Patient Handling and Movement Assessments: A White Paper (2010)
Comprehensive Risk Assessment
Ceiling Hoist Estimations
Determine % of patients requiring lift% Dependent + % Extensive Assistance = % Requiring lift
Determine # of rooms requiring lift # Patients x % Requiring Lift = # of Rooms with lift
The Facility Guidelines Institute 2010, Patient Handling and Movement Assessments: A White Paper (2010 )
Example:30% Dependent + 20% Ext Assist = 50% Require lift50 Patients x 50% Require lift = 25 Bed spaces have a lift
Equipment Considerations Where it will be used and stored Number of staff required Size and dimensions Maintenance Features Safe Working Load (SWL) Provision for Bariatric patients
33% CMDHB adults are obese Compared with 23% for NZ
NZ Health Survey 2006/2007
www.liko.com
Turning Space
Sourced: ARJO Guidebook for Architects and Planners, 2005
Dimensional Considerations Width of the room – for turning space
Room layout and adaptability – bathroom and bedroom
Wide doorways and corridors - to fit equipment through
Position of toilet - with space each side
Location of services – storage of equipment
Bariatric and other specialist areas
Copyright CMDHB 2011 NZ Patient Handling Guidelines 2003
Process Considerations
Stakeholder awareness of safe handling Specialist Resource Availability Meeting Format Stakeholders requirements and focus Layers of hierarchy Prioritisation of needs
– Clinical– Functional– Budgetary
Overcoming Challenges
Research: – Articles and resources– Industry expertise – Assessment Tools
Moving and Handling network Supplier advice___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Work directly with clinicians Obtain senior management commitment Develop committee OH&SS team generic guidelines
Learnings
Highly consultative process
Project of this size needs clear:– Process for specialist input into decision making process– Prioritisation process to negotiate different stakeholder requirements
More industry research required
Recommendations
Early input from specialist Determine effective method for specialist input Business case as soon as possible Determine safe handling priorities Clearly establish patient handling needs and equipment
requirements Educate and liaise with stakeholders Hang in there!
CSB Stage 1, Phase 2 today
References
A Guide to designing Workplaces for Safer Handling of People, Worksafe Victoria, 3rd edition, Sept 2007ARJO Guidebook for Architects and Planners – Elderly Care Facilities, 2nd Edition, 2005, SwedenAustralian Health Facility Guidelines Vol 1 – Vol IV 2009CMDHB Risk Pro Incident reporting system 2011CMDHB Staff Patient Handling Survey 2011Cohen M.H, et al, Patient Handling and Movement Assessments: A White Paper. April 2010. Prepared by the 2010 Health
Guidelines REvison committee Specialty Subcommittee on Paient Movement. The Facility Guidelines Institute, April 2010.
ECRI Institute, Ceiling Mounted Patient Lifts, Health Devices, April 2009FGI Guidelines for Design and Construction of Health Care Facilities 2010 edition Joliff, J., The miracle of lifting technology. Nursing Homes Magazine. September 2006Owen, B.D. & Garg, A. (1991), AAOHN Journal, 39 (4)Patient Care Ergonomics Resource Guide: Safe Patient Handling and Movement, Department of Veteran Affairs (October 2001)Ronald, L.A, Yassi, A, Spiegel, J., Tate, R.B, Tait, D. and Mozel, M.R., Effectiveness of Installing Overhead Ceiling Lifts. AAOHN
Journal, Mar 2002, Vol 50, No 3.Spiegel, J., Yassi, A., Ronald, L.A., Tate, R.B, Hacking, P. and Colby, T. Implementing a Resident Lifting System in an Extended
Care Hospital. AAOHN Journal, Mar 2002, Vol 50, No 3.The New Zealand Patient Handling Guidelines, The Liten up Approach, ACC Worksafe 2003Weinel, D., Successful Implementation of Ceiling-Mounted Lift Systems. Rehabilitation
Nursing, Mar/Apr 2008: Vol 33, No. 2Weitekamp, K., 2011. Just five years ago Gundersen Lutheran Health System, based in La Crosse, WI, was facing a challenge
that’s common among healthcare facilities. Advance for Nurses.
Thank you
Kirstyn Albrecht– [email protected]– Occupational Health & Safety– Middlemore Hospital– Otahuhu, Auckland 1640– New Zealand– Ph: 0064 9 276 0044 extn 8570