Energy expenditure, body-part discomfort and mental work load among nurses

The purpose of this prospective observational field study was to present a model for measuring energy expenditure among nurses and to determine if there was a difference between the energy expenditure of nurses providing direct care to adult patients on general medical-surgical units in two major metropolitan hospitals and a recommended energy expenditure of 3.0 kcal/minute over 8 hours. One-third of the predicted cycle ergometer VO2max for the study population was used to calculate the recommended energy expenditure.^ Two methods were used to measure energy expenditure among participants during an 8 hour day shift. First, the Energy Expenditure Prediction Program (EEPP) developed by the University of Michigan Center for Ergonomics was used to calculate energy expenditure using activity recordings from observation (OEE; n = 39). The second method used ambulatory electrocardiography and the heart rate-oxygen consumption relationship (HREE; n = 20) to measure energy expenditure. It was concluded that energy expenditure among nurses can be estimated using the EEPP. Using classification systems from previous research, work load among the study population was categorized as "moderate" but was significantly less than (p = 0.021) 3.0 kcal/minute over 8 hours or 1/3 of the predicted VO2max.^ In addition, the relationships between OEE, body-part discomfort (BPCDS) and mental work load (MWI) were evaluated. The relationships between OEE/BPCDS and OEE/MWI were not significant (p = 0.062 and 0.091, respectively). Among the study population, body-part discomfort significantly increased for upper arms, mid-back, lower-back, legs and feet by mid-shift and by the end of the shift, the increase was also significant for neck and thighs.^ The study also provided documentation of a comprehensive list of nursing activities. Among the most important findings were the facts that the study population spent 23% of the workday in a bent posture, walked an average of 3.14 miles, and spent two-thirds of the shift doing activities other than direct patient care, such as paperwork and communicating with other departments. A discussion is provided regarding the ergonomic implications of these findings. ^

Determining appropriate measurement methods for etiological research of computing-related musculoskeletal symptoms and disorders

Two studies among college students were conducted to evaluate appropriate measurement methods for etiological research on computing-related upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders (UEMSDs). ^ A cross-sectional study among 100 graduate students evaluated the utility of symptoms surveys (a VAS scale and 5-point Likert scale) compared with two UEMSD clinical classification systems (Gerr and Moore protocols). The two symptom measures were highly concordant (Lin's rho = 0.54; Spearman's r = 0.72); the two clinical protocols were moderately concordant (Cohen's kappa = 0.50). Sensitivity and specificity, endorsed by Youden's J statistic, did not reveal much agreement between the symptoms surveys and clinical examinations. It cannot be concluded self-report symptoms surveys can be used as surrogate for clinical examinations. ^ A pilot repeated measures study conducted among 30 undergraduate students evaluated computing exposure measurement methods. Key findings are: temporal variations in symptoms, the odds of experiencing symptoms increased with every hour of computer use (adjOR = 1.1, p < .10) and every stretch break taken (adjOR = 1.3, p < .10). When measuring posture using the Computer Use Checklist, a positive association with symptoms was observed (adjOR = 1.3, p < 0.10), while measuring posture using a modified Rapid Upper Limb Assessment produced unexpected and inconsistent associations. The findings were inconclusive in identifying an appropriate posture assessment or superior conceptualization of computer use exposure. ^ A cross-sectional study of 166 graduate students evaluated the comparability of graduate students to College Computing & Health surveys administered to undergraduate students. Fifty-five percent reported computing-related pain and functional limitations. Years of computer use in graduate school and number of years in school where weekly computer use was ≥ 10 hours were associated with pain within an hour of computing in logistic regression analyses. The findings are consistent with current literature on both undergraduate and graduate students. ^

A survey of the implementation status of environmental management systems in U.S. colleges and universities, and, An environmental management system implementation model for U.S. colleges and universities

A census of 925 U.S. colleges and universities offering masters and doctorate degrees was conducted in order to study the number of elements of an environmental management system as defined by ISO 14001 possessed by small, medium and large institutions. A 30% response rate was received with 273 responses included in the final data analysis. Overall, the number of ISO 14001 elements implemented among the 273 institutions ranged from 0 to 16, with a median of 12. There was no significant association between the number of elements implemented among institutions and the size of the institution (p = 0.18; Kruskal-Wallis test) or among USEPA regions (p = 0.12; Kruskal-Wallis test). The proportion of U.S. colleges and universities that reported having implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, defined by answering yes to all 16 elements, was 10% (95% C.I. 6.6%–14.1%); however 38% (95% C.I. 32.0%–43.8%) reported that they had implemented a structured, comprehensive environmental management system, while 30.0% (95% C.I. 24.7%–35.9%) are planning to implement a comprehensive environmental management system within the next five years. Stratified analyses were performed by institution size, Carnegie Classification and job title. ^ The Osnabruck model, and another under development by the South Carolina Sustainable Universities Initiative, are the only two environmental management system models that have been proposed specifically for colleges and universities, although several guides are now available. The Environmental Management System Implementation Model for U.S. Colleges and Universities developed is an adaptation of the ISO 14001 standard and USEPA recommendations and has been tailored to U.S. colleges and universities for use in streamlining the implementation process. In using this implementation model created for the U.S. research and academic setting, it is hoped that these highly specialized institutions will be provided with a clearer and more cost-effective path towards the implementation of an EMS and greater compliance with local, state and federal environmental legislation. ^