5 minute read
Cross-disciplinary prevalence and associated factors for work-related discomfort in users of ultrasonography: Implications for sonography professionals and health care administrators
Cross-disciplinary prevalence and associated factors for work-related discomfort in users of ultrasonography: Implications for sonography professionals and health care administrators
REVIEWED BY Kim Prince | ASA SIG: Cardiac
REFERENCE | Authors: Roll S, Fukumura Y, Stigall-Weikle N & Evans K
WHY THE STUDY WAS PERFORMED
To examine relationships within and across sonography work systems, and to examine worker health and wellbeing and explore work systems and process factors associated with workrelated discomfort of sonographers.
HOW THE STUDY WAS PERFORMED
One hundred thousand ultrasonography users were invited to complete an online questionnaire via email. The questionnaire included demographics, selected constructs from the sonographer work systems (SWS) framework and the prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal discomfort, visual discomfort, and headaches. Musculoskeletal discomfort was identified as any ache, pain, stiffness, burning, numbness, tingling or other self-reported symptoms within the body in the last 12 months. Musculoskeletal discomfort was examined across nine body regions: shoulder, elbow, wrist/hands, neck, upper back, lower back, hip/thigh, knees, and ankle/feet. Follow-up questions were completed for certain body regions with a rating of the intensity of discomfort from 0 to 10 using a visual analogue scale. Respondents also indicated if they had sought additional healthcare support (i.e. physiotherapist, doctor, etc.) or took any sick leave due to the discomfort. Those respondents who indicated discomfort also commented on whether the discomfort was made worse by any activities (even non-work-related activities) or if the discomfort led to a permanent or temporary change in job or duties. Respondent questions also included information to establish body mass index, age, handedness, location and work status such as full or part-time employment and their main area of practice i.e. cardiac, MSK, obstetrics, etc. Those who indicated they had completed ergonomics training answered further questions regarding the method of training and how recently this training was completed.
WHAT THE STUDY FOUND
From 3659 valid responses (those not currently working or did not provide contact information were excluded), 86% reported that they regularly experienced musculoskeletal discomfort directly related to their work. The common practice sonographic specialities of respondents were vascular, abdomen, OB-GYN, and adult cardiac. Hospitals and outpatient clinics in the USA were the most common workplaces with most of the sample, stating they worked full-time. There were 54.2% of respondents who engaged in ergonomics training, of which 85.2% indicated this was helpful, and 90.4% reported they were able to apply the ergonomics training to the workplace and suggested using adjustable equipment approximately 74% of the time. Primarily, a positive workplace culture was reported. The stated key factors associated with the reduced likelihood of work-related discomfort are: engaging in a positive work culture, minimising interruptions to workflow, taking more work breaks, and using adjustable equipment more frequently.
It was noted that, on average, employers only had around 2 of the 7 recommended ergonomics policies or procedures in place. One-third of respondents had reported an ergonomic concern in the workplace, of which only 27% felt that their concern was adequately addressed, and more disturbingly, 6% reported experiencing retaliation or threat of retaliation for reporting their ergonomic issues.
Even with ergonomic training, sonographers are still experiencing a high rate of work-related musculoskeletal discomfort.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
The study concluded that despite increased participation in ergonomics training and the use of adjustable equipment, the prevalence of work-related discomfort remained high in sonographers. There is a need for more attention to be directed at organisational factors and work processes to identify and implement solutions to improve the health and wellbeing of sonographers. Workplace employers need to ensure appropriate policies and procedures are in place to ensure sonographer welfare is addressed, and employees should not feel they are at risk of retaliation by raising ergonomic concerns.
Individuals without work-related musculoskeletal discomfort appeared to be from workplaces with positive protective factors such as adjustable equipment, work breaks, ergonomic policies and work culture. Those who reported discomfort experienced interrupted workflow timing and pressure and poor performance more than those without discomfort. Fewer than 15% of respondents took time off work or changed their job duties due to their discomfort, which is a disturbing finding. It would be interesting to investigate the main reasonings for this i.e. concerns about retaliation.
Sonographer injury and musculoskeletal issues are a major factor with sonographers of all types, and the busier medical imaging becomes, the more pressure is placed on sonographers to accomplish more with less attention focused on their health and wellbeing. Identifying key strategies that workplaces and sonographers can implement may assist in reducing the number of work-related discomforts. However, more research may be required in this area to establish such significant strategies.
