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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

16. Indicate the time period between the baseline measurement and all subsequentfollow up measurements. Use months to indicate the length of follow up, for example,questionnaires were administered at 6, 12, and 18 months. Indicate in months if possible, ifnot in weeks, days etc. or enter “NP”. Please make sure that you describe all interventiongroups and all referent groups using the same group notation throughout the data extractionforms.E.g., Baseline data collected on May 1st, 2000. Intervention implemented June 1st, 2000continues until June 1 st , 2001. Follow-up data collected on May 1 st , 2002. Note thisinformation may be presented in a number of ways (tables, figures, timelines etc). In thisexample, the length of follow-up is I 1 =24 months.Often in administrative data there are not multiple time points of outcome data collection.Instead there are time periods over which data are collected. For “administrative” data, it isbest to establish what the intervention period is first. Then establish the baseline data periodfor outcome measurements. This period may be a month, 6 months, or years before theintervention. State the full time-period for which baseline outcome data was collected (e.g.,“data was collected 3 years prior to lifts installation” answer: April 1998 to April 2002).Finally, establish the follow-up period (e.g., “We compared to 3 years after the lifts werecompleted installation” answer: July 2002 to July 2005).Study Group Questions:17. Describe overall (study) group. Intervention(s) + Control(s)Sample SizeAge (mean, SD, range)% femaleLoss to Follow up (N)18. Describe the Intervention group(s). Provide answer(s) for each category - enter “NP” inall comment boxes where information is not available. If design is cross-over then answer forI 1 C only.*Use notation (I 1 , I 2 , and I 1 C)Sample Size Eg: I 1 =, I 2 =, … (or I 1 C= )Age (mean, SD, range) Eg: I 1 =, I 2 =, … (or I 1 C= )% female Eg: I 1 =, I 2 =, … (or I 1 C= )Loss to Follow up (N) Eg: I 1 =, I 2 =, …(or I 1 C= )Time Period of Measurements (start date to end date)19. Describe the Referent group. Provide answer(s) for each category - enter “NP” in allcomment boxes where information is not available. If design is cross-over then answer forI 2 C only.*Use notation (C, I 1 C, and I 2 C).78 Institute for Work & Health
Sample SizeEg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I 2 C= …)Age (mean, SD, range) Eg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I 2 C= …)% female Eg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I 2 C= …)Loss to Follow up (N) Eg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I 2 C= …)Time Period of Measurements (start date to end date)Covariate Questions:20. When were potential covariates/confounders measured (check all that apply)?If covariates were measured any time prior to intervention this will be counted as baseline. Ifunsure then please describe. Shelley will be reviewing all “unsure” answers.*We do not consider pre-intervention measures of the outcome (i.e., dependant variable) tobe a covariate.Baseline at time of outcome measurementBaseline near intervention implementationFollow upUnsure (please describe)Not Applicable (Not Measured)21. Provide a list of covariates/confounding variables that were controlled for in thefinal test of the intervention effectiveness. Enter “NA” if no covariates/confounders weretested in the final analysis.Outcome Questions: SRS will drop certain questions depending on the answers to thefollowing 3 outcome questions.22. Does the study use “administrative” records to collect measurements ofinjury/illness outcomes?By administrative records we mean regulatory required employer record keeping data (e.g.,OSHA logs), voluntary employer record keeping data (e.g., incident reports), or insurancerecord keeping systems (e.g., worker’s comp). Voluntary employer record keeping systemsare any record keeping that either regulatory agencies or insurance agencies do not require.Describe succinctly in the comment box the type of administrative record.YesNo23. Does the study use self-report questionnaire records to collect measurements ofinjury/illness outcomes?Describe succinctly in the comment box the nature of the questionnaire used.E.g., symptom frequency, VAS pain scale, or intensity.A systematic review of injury and illness prevention and loss control (IPC) programs79
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 and 74: Q17. Was the calendar duration of t
Page 75 and 76: a) YesBaseline differences were obs
Page 77 and 78: 5. List the jurisdiction where the
Page 79: have intended to prevent both “as
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 ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?