Cargando…

Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol

Intensification of modern swine production has led to many new technologies, including needleless injectors. Although needleless injectors may increase productivity (by reducing injection time) and reduce needlestick injuries, the effect on risk for musculoskeletal disorders is not clear. This proje...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Trask, Catherine, Bath, Brenna, Milosavljevic, Stephan, Kociolek, Aaron M., Predicala, Bernardo, Penz, Erika, Adebayo, Olugbenga, Whittington, Lee
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5094509
_version_ 1783278029198327808
author Trask, Catherine
Bath, Brenna
Milosavljevic, Stephan
Kociolek, Aaron M.
Predicala, Bernardo
Penz, Erika
Adebayo, Olugbenga
Whittington, Lee
author_facet Trask, Catherine
Bath, Brenna
Milosavljevic, Stephan
Kociolek, Aaron M.
Predicala, Bernardo
Penz, Erika
Adebayo, Olugbenga
Whittington, Lee
author_sort Trask, Catherine
collection PubMed
description Intensification of modern swine production has led to many new technologies, including needleless injectors. Although needleless injectors may increase productivity (by reducing injection time) and reduce needlestick injuries, the effect on risk for musculoskeletal disorders is not clear. This project will compare conventional needles with needleless injectors in terms of cost, productivity, injury rates, biomechanical exposures, and worker preference. Muscle activity (EMG) and hand/wrist posture will be measured on swine workers performing injection tasks with both injection methods. Video recordings during the exposure assessments will compare the duration and productivity for each injection method using time-and-motion methods. Injury claim data from up to 60 pig barns will be analyzed for needlestick and musculoskeletal injuries before/after needleless injector adoption. Workers and managers will be asked about what they like and dislike about each method and what helps and hinders successful implementation. The information above will be input into a cost-benefit model to determine the incremental effects of needleless injectors in terms of occupational health, worker preference, and the financial “bottom line” of the farm. Findings will be relevant to the swine industry and are intended to be transferable to other new technologies in animal production.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5682043
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56820432017-12-06 Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol Trask, Catherine Bath, Brenna Milosavljevic, Stephan Kociolek, Aaron M. Predicala, Bernardo Penz, Erika Adebayo, Olugbenga Whittington, Lee Biomed Res Int Research Article Intensification of modern swine production has led to many new technologies, including needleless injectors. Although needleless injectors may increase productivity (by reducing injection time) and reduce needlestick injuries, the effect on risk for musculoskeletal disorders is not clear. This project will compare conventional needles with needleless injectors in terms of cost, productivity, injury rates, biomechanical exposures, and worker preference. Muscle activity (EMG) and hand/wrist posture will be measured on swine workers performing injection tasks with both injection methods. Video recordings during the exposure assessments will compare the duration and productivity for each injection method using time-and-motion methods. Injury claim data from up to 60 pig barns will be analyzed for needlestick and musculoskeletal injuries before/after needleless injector adoption. Workers and managers will be asked about what they like and dislike about each method and what helps and hinders successful implementation. The information above will be input into a cost-benefit model to determine the incremental effects of needleless injectors in terms of occupational health, worker preference, and the financial “bottom line” of the farm. Findings will be relevant to the swine industry and are intended to be transferable to other new technologies in animal production. Hindawi 2017 2017-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5682043/ /pubmed/29214171 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5094509 Text en Copyright © 2017 Catherine Trask et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Trask, Catherine
Bath, Brenna
Milosavljevic, Stephan
Kociolek, Aaron M.
Predicala, Bernardo
Penz, Erika
Adebayo, Olugbenga
Whittington, Lee
Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title_full Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title_fullStr Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title_short Evaluating Swine Injection Technologies as a Workplace Musculoskeletal Injury Intervention: A Study Protocol
title_sort evaluating swine injection technologies as a workplace musculoskeletal injury intervention: a study protocol
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5682043/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29214171
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/5094509
work_keys_str_mv AT traskcatherine evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT bathbrenna evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT milosavljevicstephan evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT kociolekaaronm evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT predicalabernardo evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT penzerika evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT adebayoolugbenga evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol
AT whittingtonlee evaluatingswineinjectiontechnologiesasaworkplacemusculoskeletalinjuryinterventionastudyprotocol