If you've seen one construction worksite stretch and flex program … you've seen one construction worksite stretch and flex program |
| |
| Institution: | 1. The Center for Pain Recovery, 18444 West, 10 Mile Road, STE 102, Southfield, MI 48075, USA;2. Laboratory Operations, Alere Toxicology, 9417 Brodie Lane, Austin, TX 78748, USA;3. Department of Pathology, Wayne State University School of Medicine, 540 East Canfield, Detroit, MI 48201, USA;4. Consolidated Laboratory Management Systems, 24555 Southfield Road, Southfield, MI 48075, USA;1. Berlin, Germany;2. Technische Universität München;1. Department of Applied and Computational Mathematics and Statistics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, United States;2. Clinical Biostatistics, Merck Research Labs, Rahway, NJ 07065, United States;1. Division of General Medical Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, 4523 Clayton Avenue, Campus Box 8005, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA;2. St. Louis Carpenters Joint Apprenticeship Program (CJAP), Nelson-Mulligan Carpenters’ Training Center, 8300 Valcour, St. Louis, MO 63123, USA;3. Carpenters District Council of Greater St. Louis and Vicinity, 1401 Hampton Avenue, St. Louis, MO 63139, USA;4. Division of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Duke University, DUMC 3834, Durham, NC 27705, USA;5. Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University School of Medicine, 4444 Forest Park Ave., CB 8505, St. Louis, MO 63108, USA;1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, ASTT LECCO, Leopoldo Mandic Hospital, Merate, Italy;2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of BARI, Bari, Italy |
| |
| Abstract: | BackgroundWork-related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSD) account for approximately one-third of all injuries in the U.S. construction industry. Many companies have implemented stretch and flex (s/f) programs to reduce WMSD despite a lack of evidence showing effectiveness.MethodsWe conducted a mixed-methods study to understand (a) why employers continue devoting resources to s/f programs; (b) how programs vary; and (c) any actual or perceived benefits.ResultsNineteen safety and health professionals were interviewed and 133 more (13.3% response rate) completed an on-line survey. Fifty-six percent had implemented an s/f program with the primary goal of reducing WMSDs; though most did not review data to determine goal achievement. Program structure varied in terms of duration, frequency, and type of stretches. There was strong agreement about mandating attendance but not participation, due primarily to liability issues. Cost was a factor when deciding to implement a program but not for sustaining one. The majority had not implemented other ergonomic prevention activities, but many had started conducting daily safety huddles for task and safety planning. Those reporting a reduction in WMSDs agreed that it was not due to the s/f program alone and that other benefits included increased worker camaraderie, communication, and collaboration.ConclusionAlthough there is little to no scientific evidence showing that they work as intended, construction companies continue to implement s/f programs with the goal of reducing WMSDs. Bringing work crews together for s/f activities has prompted employers to also begin conducting daily safety huddles. Although employers may not be able to link reduced WMDS to an s/f program, the ancillary benefits may warrant the time and resources.Practical applicationsS/f programs should be only one component of a more comprehensive ergonomics prevention program. Conducting daily safety huddles at the same time also may enhance worker communication, camaraderie, collaboration and improve safety outcomes. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
