SynthesisWork (Reading, Mass.)2017
Outcomes of safe patient handling and mobilization programs: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Work (Reading, Mass.), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do Technical Aids for Patient Handling Prevent Musculoskeletal Complaints in Health Care Workers?-A Systematic Review of Intervention Studies.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Safe patient handling: Exploring work constraints faced by healthcare workers in a Portuguese hospital.Work (Reading, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Use of patient- handling devices and coworker assistance in long-term care settings: A cross-sectional study.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Article
- Rehabilitation Professionals' Self-Perceived Competence in Safe Patient Handling and Mobility Methods Before and After Training: A Cohort Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Safe Patient Handling Equipment and Techniques: A Review of Biomechanical Studies.Human factors · 2024Review
- Prevalence of Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders and Its Effects amongst Nurses in the Selected Intellectual Disability Unit of the Limpopo Province.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- The impact of manual patient handling on work ability: A cross-sectional study in a Brazilian hospital.Nursing open · 2022Observational
- Critical review on applications and roles of exoskeletons in patient handling.International journal of industrial ergonomics · 2022Article
- Ergonomic exposures and control measures associated with mass fatality decedent handling in morgues and body collection points in a New York healthcare system during COVID-19: A case series.International journal of industrial ergonomics · 2022Article
- It Is Time to Implement Primary Prevention in the Workplace to Ameliorate the Ongoing U.S. Opioid Epidemic.New solutions : a journal of environmental and occupational health policy : NS · 2021Article
- Influence of Work-Related Safety and Health Guidelines on Knowledge and Prevalence of Occupational Back Pain among Rehabilitation Nurses in Saudi Arabia: A 6-Month Follow-Up Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVariability in patient care settings and the range of patient handling tasks present challenges in developing and evaluating safe patient handling and mobilization (SPHM) programs.
objectiveWe performed a systematic meta-analysis of SPHM program evaluations.
methodsSystematic literature review identified published SPHM program evaluations. Injury Rate Ratios (IRR), pre- to post-intervention, were used to estimate intervention effects and to examine the influence of patient care level, program components, and follow-up time using meta-regression.
results27 articles reported evaluations from 44 sites. Combined effect estimate for all SPHM programs was 0.44 (95% CI 0.36, 0.54), reflecting substantial injury reductions after program implementation. While specific program components were not associated with greater effectiveness, longer follow-up duration was associated with greater injury rate reduction (p = 0.01) and intervention effects varied by level of care (p = 0.01), with the greatest effect in intensive care unit interventions (IRR 0.14; 95% CI 0.07, 0.30).
conclusionsSPHM programs appear to be highly effective in reducing injuries. More research is needed to identify the most effective interventions for different patient care levels.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.