Prevalence and Ergonomic Risk Factors of Work‐related Musculoskeletal Injuries amongst Underground Mine Workers in Zambia: Richard KUNDA, et al. Physiotherapy Department, University of the Western Cape, South Africa—Work‐related musculoskeletal injuries (WMSIs) are common in both developed and third world countries. Most researchers agree that exposure to ergonomic risk factors is a major contributor to these injuries. Objective The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of and ergonomic risk factors associated with WMSIs amongst underground mine workers in Kitwe, Zambia. Methods A cross‐sectional quantitative study was conducted using a sample size of 500 workers. A stratified random sampling method according to mining work activity type was used to obtain the sample. Data was collected by means of a structured questionnaire, and the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) was used to analyze data using descriptive and inferential statistical methods. Results were significant at 5%. Results A response rate of 40.4% (202) was obtained. The 12month prevalence of WMSIs was 42.6%. The mean age of the workers was 40.31 years (SD +/− 8.57 years). Electricians and mechanics reported the highest injury frequencies. The back was the most affected body part. Ergonomic risk factors consistently reported by workers included poor postures and heavy lifting. There were significant (p=0.020) associations between working with the back bent and sustaining a back injury. Significant (p=0.049) associations were also found between injuries of the wrists/hands and grasping an unsupported object(s). Conclusions This study revealed significant associations between WMSIs and ergonomic risk factors like working with the back bent and grasping objects.

Health related quality of life (HRQoL)

BackgroundMeasurement of the extent of disability post-stroke is important to determine the impact of disability on these individuals and the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing the impact of their disability. Instruments used to measure disability should, however, be culturally sensitive.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a disability assessment using the World Health Organization’s Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS).MethodsA cross-sectional design was used. The study population included a conveniently selected 226 stroke patients living within community settings. These patients were followed up 6–12 months following the onset of the stroke and are currently residing in the community. Disability was measured using the WHODAS 2.0 and the data were analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics in Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). The WHODAS 2.0 enabled the assessment of disability within the domains of cognition, mobility, self-care, getting along with others, household activities, work activities and participation. Ethical clearance for the study was obtained from the University of the Western Cape.ResultsIn this sample, the domain mostly affected were household activities, with 38% having extreme difficulty with conducting these activities. This was followed by mobility (27%) and self-care (25%) being the domains that participants also had extreme difficulty with. Getting along with others was the domain that most (51%) of the participants had no difficulty with. ANOVA one-way test showed no significant association of participation restrictions with demographics factors.ConclusionRehabilitation of patients with stroke should focus on the patient’s ability to engage in household activities, mobility and self-care.

A  growing  shift  towards  research  and  evidence  based  practice  in academia  is  associated  with  requirements  to  disseminate  research  results  in  the  form of publication in peer reviewed journals.  Mentoring has been identified as an important component of developing young authors, as it increases confidence and competence, and facilitates professional development. This led to the formation of a support group to stimulate peer-review publication in the physiotherapy department at  the  University  of  the  Western  Cape.  The  Kirkpatrick  Framework  of  Evaluation  was  used  to  evaluate  the  success  of  the  mentoring  process  which  made  use  of  a  participatory  action  research  methodology. The  writing  group  consisted  of  nine  academic members of staff and took place over ten weeks.  The programme included writing, giving feedback, discussion and peer review on a weekly basis.  Focus group discussions were taped and transcribed in order to evaluate the mentoring process  by  identifying  relationships  within  the  data  and  categorising  key  concepts,  which were shaped into a thematic framework.  The findings indicated that participants experienced a variety of emotions throughout the programme, with an overall feeling of personal growth by the end. In addition, participants also reported improved writing, reviewing and communication skills.  Six months following the programme, six participants had submitted at least one article to a peer reviewed journal.  It is clear from this study that some academics still find the task of writing and reviewing articles daunting, and that guidance and support in the form of a writing programme can be useful.

BACKGROUND: Individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia often experience major limitations in returning to work despite participating in rehabilitation programs. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to determine whether individuals who were diagnosed with schizophrenia experienced improved return to work rates, quality of life and self-efficacy beliefs after participating in an intervention program that utilizes the Model of Occupational Self-Efficacy (MOOSE). METHOD: Nine (n = 9) individuals who were diagnosed with schizophrenia participated in the study. The research study specifically utilized a pre- and post-intervention research design. In order to gather data from the participants, the WHO Quality of Life Questionnaire and Self-Efficacy Questionnaires were used to determine whether the individual living with schizophrenia’s quality of life and self-efficacy beliefs improved after participating in a vocational rehabilitation program. RESULTS: All participants in this study presented with an improvement in Return-to-Work Rates, Self-Efficacy Beliefs and Quality of Life scores. The results of the study revealed a 100% return to work rate, a statistically significant effect of the intervention (i.e., MOOSE) on Self-Efficacy beliefs, measured using the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale, F(1, 8) = 6.606, p = 0.03.*. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study indicated that MOOSE is a useful model to facilitate the return to work of individuals living with schizophrenia. It is also suggested that cognitive rehabilitative activities, life skills and work skills training in a real work environment be included as part of the vocational rehabilitation program.