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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

34. Was masking of physical assessment done? Provide details in the comment box tosupport your response. This question is asking if the clinician/investigator was blinded to theintervention group.YesNoUnclearNot Applicable35. Was a standard protocol used for the clinical exams?Yes (list protocol name)NoUnclear (describe)Statistical Analysis Questions:36. Please check the types of final analyses done for testing the observed effects of theintervention. (provide details about the analyses in the comment box) You should selectthe one that represents the final test not the preliminary analyses. Provide details in thecomment box to support your response. Give details if you select “other”.ANOVA (ANCOVA)MANOVA (MANCOVA)Linear/Logistic RegressionMultilevel Regression (linear or logistic)Survival RegressionPoisson RegressionPercentage of changeNonparametric testsNonparametric Matched TestNonparametric Unmatched TestOther Parametric Matched TestOther Parametric Unmatched TestNo Statistical Test37. Was there a direct statistical test or estimation of effect for the differences betweenthe intervention and the control group? If differences are not tested then one cannotconclude that the intervention had an effect.YesNoUnclear82 Institute for Work & Health
38. Describe for each injury/illness outcome the observed intervention effects. (Be briefand concise i.e., enter “effect size”, "risk ratio", "rate differences, "mean differences" etc, theactual number and associated outcome). For administrative data, multiple types ofinformation might be reported. For self-reported and clinical data, please report by body part.PLEASE use notation HWE, NS, UB, LB, LKF, NAB, or O)*Organize your description of interventions according to I 1 , I 2 , C, I 1 C, and I 2 CE.g.: I 1 – LWD Rate 13% change pre vs post, I 1 = left arm RR 1.339. Remark on the findings or enter information that is unique about the study thatmay not be adequately captured in the other DE questions. Be clear and concise.Housekeeping questions:40. Check the names of both DE reviewers for this study.BA, SB, GD, EK, LL, CL, JS, LT, RW41. Is this the consensus – final - version of the DE form? Please select “no” untilconsensus has been completed.YesNoA systematic review of injury and illness prevention and loss control (IPC) programs83
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 and 80: have intended to prevent both “as
Page 81 and 82: Sample SizeEg: C 1 , C 2 , …(or I
Page 83: 29. If injury rates were calculated
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?