Desórdenes muscoloesqueléticos en el trabajador avícola – intervenciones en salud
Contribuinte(s) |
Varona-Uribe, Marcela |
---|---|
Data(s) |
06/12/2016
|
Resumo |
Introducción: El trabajador avícola presenta un alto riesgo de sufrir de Desórdenes Musculo esqueléticos, debido a la realización de trabajos manuales repetitivos; posición bípeda prolongada, posturas por fuera de ángulos de confort de miembros superiores Objetivo: Establecer las recomendaciones basadas en la evidencia de las intervenciones en salud para los Desórdenes Musculoesqueléticos (DME) en el trabajador avícola. Metodología: Se realizó una revisión de la literatura de los estudios primarios publicados en las bases de datos Medline, Scient Direct y Scielo desde 1990. Los artículos se clasificaron de acuerdo con: el tipo de estudio, la calidad de éste y el nivel de evidencia que aportaba. Resultados: Dentro de las recomendaciones de la evidencia disponible para el manejo integral de los pacientes de la industria avícola con riesgos o eventos asociados a DME se encuentran las siguientes: 1) incorporar un enfoque sistémico en la atención a dichos trabajadores, 2) incluir aspectos psicosociales en la identificación y explicación de los riesgos y eventos en salud, 3) permitir los descansos, microrupturas y pautas para el ejercicio, 4) facilitar la rotación y ampliación de puestos de trabajo, 5) mejorar las herramientas de trabajo - especialmente el corte de los cuchillos. Conclusiones: Las intervenciones descritas en la presente revisión, apuntan hacia el mejoramiento de la incidencia y la prevalencia de los DMS, la disminución de incapacidad temporal y definitiva por los DMS, el mejoramiento en la producción industrial y la reducción de costos tanto económicos como humanos. Sin embargo, se debe plantear la necesidad de continuar impulsando el desarrollo de investigaciones y estudios que permitan tener mayores elementos de juicio para poder realizar recomendaciones a los tipos de intervenciones propuestas. A pesar de lo anterior, las intervenciones en salud para los trabajadores de la industria avícola deben ser enfocadas desde la prestación integral de los servicios de salud. Barajas, Maryi Lizeth Acevedo, Sharom Irene Objective: To establish recommendations based on the evidence of health interventions for musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in the poultry worker. Methodology: A review of scientific literature of primary studies published in Medline, Science and Scielo databases from 1990 to present. The articles were classified according to the type of study, quality and the level of evidence. Results: Within the recommendations of the available evidence for the comprehensive management of patients in the poultry industry exposed to risks or events associated to MSDs were the following: 1) incorporate a systemic approach for the assistance of such workers, 2) include psychosocial aspects in the identification and explanation of health risks and events, 3) allow breaks, micro-stops and guidelines for physical exercise, 4) to facilitate the rotation and expansion of work stations and, 5) improve working tools - especially the cutting of the knives. Conclusions: The interventions described in the present revision, were targeted to: the improvement of the incidence and prevalence of MSDs, the decrease of temporary and permanent disability of MSDs, the improvement of the industrial production and cost reduction, both financial and human. However, the need to continue the promotion of research and studies should be addressed to have greater elements of judgment to be able to make recommendations on different types of proposed interventions. Despite the foregoing, health interventions for workers at the poultry industry should be focused from an integral provision of health services point of view. |
Formato |
application/pdf |
Identificador | |
Idioma(s) |
spa |
Publicador |
Facultad de Medicina |
Direitos |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Fonte |
instname:Universidad del Rosario reponame:Repositorio Institucional EdocUR 1) Food Outlook. Biannual report on global food markets 2016. FAO. Disponible: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5703e.pdf 2) National Chicken Council. Vertical Integration. Disponible en: http://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/%20industry-issues/verticalintegration/ 3) The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Associations (IUF). Disponible en : http://www.iuf.org/w/?q=node/1678 4) Marı AJ, Grzywacz JG, Arcury TA, Carrillo L, Coates ML. Evidence of Organizational Injustice in Poultry Processing Plants : Possible Effects on Occupational Health and Safety Among Latino Workers in North Carolina. 2009;48(September 2008):37–48. 5) Prevención de lesiones musculo esqueléticas en el procesamiento avícola. Departamento de Trabajo de los EE. UU. 2014. Disponible en: https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3749Spanish.pdf 6) Barro D, Teresa M, Olinto A, Block J, Macagnan A, Henn RL, et al. Job characteristics and musculoskeletal pain among shift workers of a poultry processing plant in Southern Brazil. 2015;57:448–56. 7) Rosenbaum DA, Grzywacz ÃJG, Chen H, Arcury TA, Schulz MR, Blocker JN, et al. Prevalence of Epicondylitis , Rotator Cuff Syndrome , and Low Back Pain in Latino Poultry Workers and Manual Laborers. 2013;234(September 2012):226–34. 8) Rodríguez Bustamante E, Rubiano Bello F. Prevalencia de sintomatología musculo esquelética en trabajadores de una empresa avícola de Cundinamarca en el año 2013. Universidad del Rosario. 9) North Carolina Department of Labor. Ergonomics for the Prevention of Muscoloskeletal Disorders: Guidelines for Poultry Processing; North Carolina Department of Labor: Raleigh, NC, USA, 2004. (14) 10) North Carolina Department of Labor. A Guide to Safe Working Practices in the Poultry Processing Industry; North Carolina Department of Labor: Raleigh, NC, USA, 2008; p. 34. (15) 11) Health & Safety Executive. Workplace Exposure Limits; Health & Safety Executive: London, UK, 2013. (17) 12) Health & Safety Executive. Work-Related Ill Health and Occupational Disease. Available online:http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/causdis/index.htm (accessed on 20 October 2016). (16) 13) British Meat Processors Association. Health and Safety Guidance Notes for the Meat Industry; British Meat Processors Association: London, UK, 2011; p. 172. (18) 14) United States Government Accountability Office. Safety in the Meat and Poultry Industry; GAO: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; p. 75. (19) 15) Human Rights Watch. Worker Health and Safety in the Meat and Poultry Industry; Human Rights Watch: New York, NY, USA, 2004. (20) 16) Berry J. van Holland, Remko Soer, Michiel R. de Boer, Michiel F. Reneman, Sandra Brouwer (2014) Preventive occupational health interventions in the meat processing industry in uppermiddle and highincome countries: a systematic review on their effectiveness. Int Arch Occup Environ Health (2015) 88:389–402 (9) 17) Kuoppala J, Lamminpaa A, Husman P (2008) Work health promotion, job well-being, and sickness absences—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Occup Environ Med 50(11):1216–1227. (10) 18) Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, Mahood Q (2008) Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon 39(3):342–358 (11) 19) Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011 (13) 20) Harmse JL, Engelbrecht JC, Bekker JL. The Impact of Physical and Ergonomic Hazards on Poultry Abattoir Processing Workers: A Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016;13(2). (12) 21) Ashdown, T. Enciclopedia Organización Internacional del Trabajo. Disponible en: http://www.ilo.org/global/publications/lang--es/index.htm 22) Zealand N. Musculoskeletal Disorders in Meat Processing : A review of the literature for the New Zealand meat processing industry. 2006;7(December). 23) Donovan M, Khan A, Johnston V. The Effect of a Workplace-Based Early Intervention Program on Work-Related Musculoskeletal Compensation Outcomes at a Poultry Meat Processing Plant. J Occup Rehabil. Springer US; 2016;1–11. 24) Santos J, Baptista JS, Monteiro PRR, Miguel AS, Santos R, Vaz MAP. The influence of task design on upper limb muscles fatigue during low-load repetitive work: A systematic review. Int J Ind Ergon. 2014;52:78–91. 25) Van Holland BJ, Soer R, de Boer MR, Reneman MF, Brouwer S. Preventive occupational health interventions in the meat processing industry in upper-middle and high-income countries: a systematic review on their effectiveness. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2015;88(4):389–402. 26) Padula RS, Comper MLC, Sparer EH, Dennerlein JT. Job rotation designed to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and control risk in manufacturing industries: A systematic review. Appl Ergon [Internet]. Elsevier Ltd; 2017;58:386–97. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2016.07.018 27) Laitinen H, Saari J, Kuusela J. Initiating an innovative change process for improved working conditions and ergonomics with participation and performance feedback: A case study in an engineering workshop. Int J Ind Ergon. 1997;19(4):299–305. 28) Gallagher S, Heberger JR. Examining the Interaction of Force and Repetition on Musculoskeletal Disorder Risk: A Systematic Literature Review. Hum Factors. 2013;55(1):108–24. 29) Hoe VCW, Urquhart DM, Kelsall HL, SimMR. Ergonomic design and training for preventing work-relatedmusculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb and neck in adults. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2012, Issue 8. Art. No.: CD008570. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008570.pub2. 30) Kuoppala J, Lamminpaa A, Husman P (2008) Work health promotion, job well-being, and sickness absences—a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Occup Environ Med 50(11):1216–1227 31) Rivilis I, Van Eerd D, Cullen K, Cole DC, Irvin E, Tyson J, Mahood Q (2008) Effectiveness of participatory ergonomic interventions on health outcomes: a systematic review. Appl Ergon 39(3):342–358 32) Rongen A, Robroek SJ, Van Lenthe FJ, Burdorf A (2013) Workplace health promotion: a meta-analysis of effectiveness. Am J Prev Med 44(4):406–415 33) Bertozzi L, Villafañe JH, Capra F, Reci M, Pillastrini P. Effect of an exercise programme for the prevention of back and neck pain in poultry slaughterhouse workers. Occup Ther Int. 2015;22(1):36–42. 34) Blewden M, Wyllie A (1998) Outcome evaluation findings from a pilot injury prevention project in the meat industry. J Occup Health Saf Aust N Z 14(4):401–408 35) Jones RJ (1997) Corporate ergonomics program of a large poultry processor. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 58(2):132–137 36) Moore JS, Garg A (1998) The effectiveness of participatory ergonomics in the red meat packing industry evaluation of a corporation. Int J Ind Ergon 21(1):47–58 37) Dababneh AJ, Swanson N, Shell RL (2001) Impact of added rest breaks on the productivity and well being of workers. Ergonomics 44(2):164–174 38) Genaidy AM, Delgado E, Bustos T (1995) Active microbreak effects on musculoskeletal comfort ratings in meatpacking plants. Ergonomics 38(2):326–3 39) Caple D, Moody H (2001) Cut-resistant gloves in the meat industry. J Occup Health Saf Aust N Z 17(2):153–162 40) Rosimeire S et al (2016). Job rotation designed to prevent musculoskeletal disorders and control risk in manufacturing industries: Asystematic review TEME |
Palavras-Chave | #Enfermedades ocupacionales #Industria avícola #613.62 #Músculo Esquelético -- enfermedades #Musculoskeletal disorders #Poultry industry #Worker |
Tipo |
info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion |