BACKGROUND:Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) are common among workers. Participatory Ergonomics (PE) is used as an implementation strategy to prevent these symptoms. By following the steps of PE, working groups composed and prioritised ergonomic measures, and developed an implementation plan. Working group members were responsible to implement the ergonomic measures in their departments. Little is known about factors that hamper (barriers) or enhance (facilitators) the implementation of ergonomic measures. This study aimed to identify and understand the possible barriers and facilitators that were perceived during implementation. METHODS: This study is embedded in a cluster randomised controlled trial that investigated the effectiveness of PE to prevent LBP and NP among workers. For the purpose of the current study, questionnaires were sent to 81 working group members. Their answers were used to make a first inventory of possible barriers and facilitators to implementation. Based on the questionnaire information, 15 semi-structured interviews were held to explore the barriers and facilitators in more detail. All interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, and analysed according to a systematic approach. RESULTS: All possible barriers and facilitators were obtained from questionnaire data, indicating that the semi-structured interviews did not yield information about new factors. Various barriers and facilitators were experienced. The presence of implementation plans for ergonomic measures that were already approved by the management facilitated implementation before the working group meeting. In these cases, PE served as a strategy to improve the implementation of the approved measures. Furthermore, the findings showed that the composition of a working group (i.e., including decision makers and a worker who led the implementation process) was important. Moreover, stakeholder involvement and collaboration were reported to considerably improve implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the working group as well as stakeholder involvement and collaboration were important facilitating factors. Moreover, PE was used as a strategy to improve the implementation of existing ergonomic measures. The results can be used to improve PE programmes, and thereby may contribute to the prevention of LBP and NP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27472278.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Low back pain (LBP) and neck pain (NP) are common among workers. Participatory Ergonomics (PE) is used as an implementation strategy to prevent these symptoms. By following the steps of PE, working groups composed and prioritised ergonomic measures, and developed an implementation plan. Working group members were responsible to implement the ergonomic measures in their departments. Little is known about factors that hamper (barriers) or enhance (facilitators) the implementation of ergonomic measures. This study aimed to identify and understand the possible barriers and facilitators that were perceived during implementation. METHODS: This study is embedded in a cluster randomised controlled trial that investigated the effectiveness of PE to prevent LBP and NP among workers. For the purpose of the current study, questionnaires were sent to 81 working group members. Their answers were used to make a first inventory of possible barriers and facilitators to implementation. Based on the questionnaire information, 15 semi-structured interviews were held to explore the barriers and facilitators in more detail. All interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, and analysed according to a systematic approach. RESULTS: All possible barriers and facilitators were obtained from questionnaire data, indicating that the semi-structured interviews did not yield information about new factors. Various barriers and facilitators were experienced. The presence of implementation plans for ergonomic measures that were already approved by the management facilitated implementation before the working group meeting. In these cases, PE served as a strategy to improve the implementation of the approved measures. Furthermore, the findings showed that the composition of a working group (i.e., including decision makers and a worker who led the implementation process) was important. Moreover, stakeholder involvement and collaboration were reported to considerably improve implementation. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the working group as well as stakeholder involvement and collaboration were important facilitating factors. Moreover, PE was used as a strategy to improve the implementation of existing ergonomic measures. The results can be used to improve PE programmes, and thereby may contribute to the prevention of LBP and NP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN27472278.
Authors: Irina Rivilis; Dwayne Van Eerd; Kimberley Cullen; Donald C Cole; Emma Irvin; Jonathan Tyson; Quenby Mahood Journal: Appl Ergon Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 3.661
Authors: Marie B Jørgensen; Anne Faber; Jørgen V Hansen; Andreas Holtermann; Karen Søgaard Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2011-11-01 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Justin K Benzer; Sarah Beehler; Irene E Cramer; David C Mohr; Martin P Charns; James F Burgess Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2013-01-03 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Anne Konring Larsen; Andreas Holtermann; Ole Steen Mortensen; Laura Punnett; Morten Hulvej Rod; Marie Birk Jørgensen Journal: BMC Nurs Date: 2015-09-17
Authors: Steven Visser; Henk F van der Molen; Judith K Sluiter; Monique H W Frings-Dresen Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2014-04-17 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Debbie Wierenga; Luuk H Engbers; Pepijn Van Empelen; Saskia Duijts; Vincent H Hildebrandt; Willem Van Mechelen Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-12-17 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: R A Kraaijeveld; F G Schaafsma; S M Ketelaar; C R L Boot; U Bültmann; J R Anema Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-03-12 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Nina Zipfel; Paul B van der Nat; Benno J W M Rensing; Edgar J Daeter; Gert P Westert; A Stef Groenewoud Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2019-09-06 Impact factor: 2.655