Qualitative and quantitative comparison of physical and mental state during nursing before and after a basic introduction into kinesthetic nursing in a nuclear and radio-therapeutic clinic

Abstract

Competence was already high in the team at the time of the first interview, but even improved by the time of the second interview. This is expressed by the resource-oriented patient-nurse partnership in the process of nursing, by team communication, as well as the heavily weighing discrepancy between knowledge and limited authorisation.

Influence of the Kinaesthetics care conception during patient handling on the development of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases – A scoping review

“…Although much important information in the systematic review of Sedlak-Emperer was reported (purpose, population, intervention, outcome, appraisal tools, study results), others were missing (study protocol, amount of reviewers, procedure of title-abstract- and full text screening) [ 56 ]. The same applies for the study of Christen et al [ 46 ]. Due to the Finnish language in the study of Tamminen-Peter (and a resulting language barrier), assessment of this category was “unclear” [ 48 ].…”

“…Thirteen studies were appropriate for the qualitative analysis: Two randomized controlled trials [ 47 , 51 ], one cross-over study [ 48 ], one controlled before-after study [ 57 ], three uncontrolled before-after studies [ 46 , 49 , 52 ], three evaluation studies [ 45 , 50 , 53 ], one qualitative study [ 55 ] and two reviews [ 54 , 56 ]. The difference between the before-after studies and the evaluation studies was that outcomes in the evaluation studies were only measured once (at the end of the project), whereas the outcomes of the before-after studies were measured at baseline and at follow-up.…”

“…“Reporting quality” was at “low risk of bias” in three studies [ 50 , 55 , 57 ]. For three studies judgment of that category was unclear [ 46 , 48 , 56 ]. Although much important information in the systematic review of Sedlak-Emperer was reported (purpose, population, intervention, outcome, appraisal tools, study results), others were missing (study protocol, amount of reviewers, procedure of title-abstract- and full text screening) [ 56 ].…”

“…In the evaluation studies a control group and a follow-up were missing [ 45 , 50 , 53 ]. As its name implies, a control group was missing in the uncontrolled before-after studies [ 46 , 49 , 52 ]. No randomization and no blinding were conducted in the non-randomized controlled trial of Tamminen-Peter and in the controlled before-after study of Hock-Rummelhardt [ 48 , 57 ].…”

“…Such a difference between the intervention and the control group was not seen for the reduction of perceived exertion of the shoulder joints. In a before-after study of Christen et al physical demands of work were described mainly as too high at baseline and as relatively tolerable especially at follow-up [ 46 ]. In another before-after study, Maietta and Resch-Kröll reported the reduction of the perceived exertion during patient handling for different kinds of patients (care-dependent patients, obese patients, patients with high body tension) from baseline to follow-up (no p -values provided) [ 49 ].…”