A systematic review of injury/illness prevention and loss control ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

For example – intervention started in 2000 and OSHA records from 1997 werereported as “pre-intervention” datac) Follow Upd) Unsuree) Not MeasuredPotential ConfoundersQ20. Were any confounders/effect modifiers measured?A confounder is a variable which is independently related to the exposure (theintervention) and the health outcome (e.g. injury rates). Effect modifiers are variablesthat modify the association between intervention and outcomes. Potentialconfounders/effect modifiers relevant to this study could be: age, sex, yearsemployed, work load, work role function, prior history of injury, psychosocial factors,etc. It is extremely important to measure potential confounders as they could maskany true associations that may be present in a given study.Analysisa) Yesb) Unclearc) Nod) Not applicableQ21. Were the statistical analyses appropriate to the study design?a) YesStatistical methods are described sufficiently, and the methods used were appropriateand properly applied.b) Unclearc) NoAn example where the statistical methods would be inappropriate is if the design hasa control group and no between group statistical comparisons are made. Similarly, ifthere are pre/post measures of the outcome the statistical analyses would beinappropriate if the pre-intervention measures are not considered in the analysis.Q22. Was there adjustment for relevant pre-intervention differences?Statistical adjustment allows the researchers to control for factors that may potentiallyconfound the relationship between the intervention and outcome. Possible adjustmentmethods include stratifying based on the difference (for example if sex is differentone can do separate analyses for males and females). Another method is includingthe variable in the statistical model, this does not allow for the variable to vary, whicheliminates its effect on the association of interest.72 Institute for Work & Health
a) YesBaseline differences were observed and adjusted forb) Unclearc) NoBaseline differences were observed but not adjusted ford) Not applicableThere were no baseline differences observed so adjustment was not neededQ23. Should this reference proceed to data extraction? Why?Using all the information you have gathered on the article and after criticallyappraising its quality, please assess how confident you are that the results are valid,reliable and that bias in the results was minimal. If certain issues pertaining to thestudy quality have reduced your confidence in the results, please summarize these inthe space provided.a) Yesb) NoQ24. Are there other studies listed in this reference list which should be retrieved forconsideration? (if yes, please include author/year/publication etc.)The primary authors will be the ones focusing on this question. However, if in yourrole as a general reviewer you discover a reference you think is important – pleaseidentify it. Often, the search will pick up Part I of a two part publication and we wantto ensure we are rating “studies” not articles. It is important for us two both identifystudies that might have been missed in the search and to bring together multiplearticles that might have been written for one study.a) Yesb) NoQ25. Is this the consensus version of the QA?After consensus between reviewers is reached one reviewer will update their entry toinclude the consensus answers. The consensus version will move forward to DE.a) Yesb) NoA systematic review of injury and illness prevention and loss controlPrograms (IPCs)73
Page 1 and 2:
A systematic review of injury/illne
Page 3 and 4:
Table of ContentsForeword ………
Page 5 and 6:
ForewordIn recent years, the Instit
Page 7 and 8:
employers with valuable information
Page 9 and 10:
forward. In 1970, the Occupational
Page 11 and 12:
Figure 1: IPC frameworkInput(to wor
Page 13 and 14:
publish the results of the review i
Page 15 and 16:
A key part of the literature would
Page 17 and 18:
2.4 Level 2 - Quality AssessmentIn
Page 19 and 20:
allowed us to insure the answers pr
Page 21 and 22:
Table 4: Best evidence synthesis gu
Page 23 and 24: Figure 3: Flowchart of systematic r
Page 25 and 26: • Return-to-work/disability manag
Page 27 and 28: etween groups, but only 32% adjuste
Page 29 and 30: Workstationadjustment andtrainingRo
Page 31 and 32: focused on just RTW (Durand et al.
Page 33 and 34: ExerciseThree medium quality studie
Page 35 and 36: compensation and medical bills is m
Page 37 and 38: interventions provide an insufficie
Page 39 and 40: Researchers and practitioners also
Page 41 and 42: 5.0 MessagesBefore making recommend
Page 43 and 44: 1) Of the articles that remained af
Page 45 and 46: 11) Agency for Healthcare Research
Page 47 and 48: Carayon P, Haims MC, Hoonakker PLT,
Page 49 and 50: workers: Randomized controlled work
Page 51 and 52: Nelson NA, Silverstein BA. Workplac
Page 53 and 54: pain in sedentary office workers -
Page 55 and 56: Appendix A: Content expertsNameBarb
Page 57 and 58: Appendix C: Stakeholder search term
Page 59 and 60: Appendix D - Literature search term
Page 61 and 62: A systematic review of injury and i
Page 63 and 64: Zohar DZohar D,Modifying Supervisor
Page 65 and 66: Level 1 Guide for ReviewersThe guid
Page 67 and 68: Appendix G: Quality Appraisal Revie
Page 69 and 70: Q4. Were time-based comparisons use
Page 71 and 72: If there are no major significant d
Page 73: Q17. Was the calendar duration of t
Page 77 and 78: 5. List the jurisdiction where the
Page 79 and 80: have intended to prevent both “as
Page 81 and 82: Sample SizeEg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I
Page 83 and 84: 29. If injury rates were calculated
Page 85 and 86: 38. Describe for each injury/illnes
Page 87 and 88: Appendix J: Quality assessment tabl
Page 89 and 90: StudyTime-Based ComparisonsRandom A
Page 91 and 92: Appendix K: Intervention descriptio
Page 93 and 94: InterventionCategoryErgonomictraini
Page 95 and 96: InterventionCategoryBricklayingmeth
Page 97 and 98: InterventionCategoryTraining &equip
Page 99 and 100: Appendix L: Study description*key t
Page 101 and 102: InterventioncategoryPrograms(regula
Page 103 and 104: InterventioncategoryWorkstationadju
Page 105 and 106: InterventioncategoryErgonomictraini
Page 107 and 108: InterventioncategoryAuthor, Year QA
Page 109: InterventioncategoryWorkstationadju
show all

A systematic review of injury/illness prevention and loss control ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?