1. Poster Print Size: This poster template is 36” high by 48” wide. It can be used to print any poster with a 3:4 aspect ratio. Placeholders: The various elements included in this poster are ones we often see in medical, research, and scientific posters. Feel free to edit, move, add, and delete items, or change the layout to suit your needs. Always check with your conference organizer for specific requirements. Image Quality: You can place digital photos or logo art in your poster file by selecting the Insert, Picture command, or by using standard copy & paste. For best results, all graphic elements should be at least 150-200 pixels per inch in their final printed size. For instance, a 1600 x 1200 pixel photo will usually look fine up to 8“- 10” wide on your printed poster. To preview the print quality of images, select a magnification of 100% when previewing your poster. This will give you a good idea of what it will look like in print. If you are laying out a large poster and using half-scale dimensions, be sure to preview your graphics at 200% to see them at their final printed size. Please note that graphics from websites (such as the logo on your hospital's or university's home page) will only be 72dpi and not suitable for printing. [This sidebar area does not print.] Change Color Theme: This template is designed to use the built-in color themes in the newer versions of PowerPoint. To change the color theme, select the Design tab, then select the Colors drop-down list. The default color theme for this template is “Office”, so you can always return to that after trying some of the alternatives. Printing Your Poster: Once your poster file is ready, visit www.genigraphics.com to order a high-quality, affordable poster print. Every order receives a free design review and we can deliver as fast as next business day within the US and Canada. Genigraphics® has been producing output from PowerPoint® longer than anyone in the industry; dating back to when we helped Microsoft® design the PowerPoint® software. US and Canada: 1-800-790-4001 Email: info@genigraphics.com [This sidebar area does not print.] Safe Patient Handling & No Lift Policy: Reducing The Incidence Of Work-Related Injuries Among Nursing Staff Marissa N. Scanlon, MSN, RN, PHN, CNL University of San Francisco, School of Nursing and Health Professions Marissa N. Scanlon University of San Francisco, School of Nursing and Health Professions Email: marissa.scanlon@gmail.com Phone: (925) 963-9824 Contact 1.Boynton, T., Kelly, L., Perez, A., Miller, M., An., Y., & Trudgen, C. (2014). Banner mobility assessment tool for nurses: instrument validation. American journal of safe patient handling movement, 4(3): 86-92. 2.Campo, M., Shiyko, M.P., Margulis, H., & Darragh, A.R. (2013). Effect of safe patient handling program on rehabilitation outcomes. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 94: 17-22. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.08.213 3.H.R. 2480 – 113 th Congress (2013-2014). Nurse and Health Care Worker Protection Act of 2013. Library of congress. Retrieved from https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/2480 4.Hunter, B., Branson, M., & Davenport, D. (2010). Saving costs, saving health care provider’s backs, and creating a safe patient environment. Nursing economics, 28(2): 130-135. Retrieved from http://0web.a.ebscohost.com.ignacio.usfca.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/ pdfviewer?sid=3860bd7a-8a6e-48ef-aaf2-bd3da4bbf521%40sessionmgr4005&vid=11&hid=4101 5.United States Department of Labor: Occupational Safety & Health Administration (2013). Healthcare: Safe patient handling. Safety and health topics. Retrieved from https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/healthcarefacilities/safepatienthandling.html 6.United States Department of Labor: Occupational Safety & Health Administration (2013). Safe patient handling programs. Effectiveness and cost savings. Retrieved from: https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3279.pdf References Background: Patient handling is a major risk factor for work-related injuries among nurses. Inadequate and inappropriate safe patient handling practices contribute to increased work-related injuries, lost/restricted work days, and hospital costs Purpose: The focus of this study was to increase the use of mechanical lift equipment and Lift Team to reduce the incidence of work-related injuries among nursing staff members involved in patient handling activities on the Medical-Cardiac IICU. Methodology: The theoretical framework employed for this project was Lippitt’s change theory. Pre- and post-survey self-report evaluations were conducted prior to and following the implementation of the Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool (BMAT) and unit specific Equipment Options Tool to measure the effectiveness of the intervention. Results: A comparison of the pre- and post-survey RN results indicated that the greatest percent change (>10%) increase included: understanding that injuries can be avoided with proper lifting and transferring of patients (18.3%), utilization of patient lifting and transferring devices whenever possible (14.6%), understanding how to select appropriate lifting equipment based on patient assessment (18.3%), understanding how to utilize patient lifting and transferring devices (11.9%), and belief that coordinating with the Lift Team to schedule timelines for Safe Patient Lifts would be helpful for staff (40.5%). Conclusion: The BMAT and the unit specific Equipment Options Tool increased the use of mechanical lift equipment among nursing staff on the Medical-Cardiac IICU. Future evaluation will indicate an increased utilization of lift equipment and team, and a sustained decrease in reported injuries, number of lost/restricted work days, and hospital costs related to patient handling activities. Limitations: The study was limited to a three-month period that resulted in a short implementation and post- intervention evaluation phase; post-surveys were distributed to 48% of the original RNs pre-surveyed Recommendations & Future Evaluation: Ensuring management and SPH unit champions facilitate sustainability of implementation on the Medical-Cardiac IICU; incorporation into EPIC. Final evaluation of project initiative can successfully be done at the end of December 2014 during the hospital wide Nursing Cost Center FY2014 SPH Quarterly Injury Report Abstract Problem Pre-Intervention: Pre-survey self-report evaluations were distributed to 44% of the total RNs and 37% of the total NAs to assess the need for safe patient handling quality improvement on the Medical-Cardiac IICU Intervention: A validated standardized Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool (BMAT) developed by Banner Health and a unit specific Equipment Options Tool for nurses were implemented on the Medical-Cardiac IICU to help nurses identify appropriate equipment and devices to ensure safe patient handling activities based on patient mobility assessments Post-Intervention: Post-survey self-report evaluations were distributed to 48% of the original pre- surveyed RNs to evaluate the effectiveness of the intervention Results: The pre- and post-survey evaluations were compared and the greatest percent change was analyzed (> 10%) Methods Results: Pre- & Post-Intervention Patient handling is a major risk factor for work-related injuries among health care workers Inadequate and inappropriate safe patient handling practices contribute to increased work-related injuries, lost/restricted work days, and hospital costs An estimated 12% of nurses leave the profession annually because of back injuries, 38% of nurses who suffer from back pain are placed on workers compensation, and more than 52% of nurses complain of chronic back pain and injuries (Hunter, et al., 2010) Costs associated with work-related injuries in the health care industry are estimated to be $20 billion annually (OSHA, 2013) The Nurse and Health Care Worker Protection Act of 2013 was introduced to decrease the potential for injury to health care personnel and patients, while reducing work-related health care costs and improving safety of patient care delivery (H.R. – 2480-113 th Congress, 2013-2014) On a hospital wide level, the most recent quarterly FY2014 SPH Injury Report (Jan-Oct) indicated: 47 injuries, 991 lost work days, 1,531 restricted work days, and an estimated $1.1 million ultimate hospital losses related to patient handling injuries Pre-Survey Results Root Cause Analysis Materials Figure 1: Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool For Nurses (BMAT) (Boynton, T., et al., 2014) Figure 2: Unit Specific Equipment Options Tool (BMAT) (Boynton, T., et al., 2014) Table 1: Five Point Likert Scale: Pre-Survey Results for RNsTable 2: Five Point Likert Scale: Pre-Survey Results for NAs Figure 3: Safe Patient Handling Pre- & Post- Survey Questions A comparison of the pre- & post- survey RN results indicated that the greatest percent change (>10%) increase included: Question #1: Understanding that injuries can be avoided with proper lifting and transferring of patients (18.3%) Question #5: Utilization of patient lifting and transferring devices whenever possible (14.6%) Question #6: Understanding how to select appropriate lifting equipment based on patient assessment (18.3%) Question #7: Understanding how to utilize patient lifting and transferring devices (11.9%) Question #10: Belief that coordinating with the Lift Team to schedule timelines for Safe Patient Lifts would be helpful for staff (40.5%) Table 3: RNs: Pre-Survey & Post-Survey Greatest Percent Change (>10%) Safe Patient Handling Pre- & Post- Survey Questions Musculoskeletal pain and/or injuries can be avoided with proper lifting and transferring of patients. I understand how to minimize injury during lifting and transfers. Patient lifting and transferring devices are readily available for me to use. I know where patient lifting and transferring devices are located on my unit. I utilize patient lifting and transferring devices whenever possible. I understand how to select appropriate lifting equipment and transferring devices based on patient assessment. I understand how to utilize patient lifting and transferring devices. Use of mechanical lift equipment would be helpful in enhancing patient safety and reducing the incidence of work-related musculoskeletal pain and/or injury. I feel that time is an issue when utilizing patient lifting and transferring devices. Coordinating with the Lift Team to schedule timelines for Safe Patient Lifts would be helpful for staff. Improper use of lift equipment Failure to anticipate needs Not up to date on EBP Ineffective training on proper use of lift equipment Unfamiliar with Safe Patient Handling Policy Lift equipment inaccessible (i.e. located at end of hall) Size of room too small to utilize lift equipment properly Lift equipment and/or devices not readily available Belief that utilizing lift equipment takes significant time Heavy workload Time constraint Patient needing immediate assistance Belief that utilizing Lift Team takes significant time RNs / NAs Not confident utilizing lift equipment Unsure which types of lift equipment to utilize Belief that manual lifting is easier / faster Lift Team unavailable Misunderstanding of Lift team’s role Lift Team Busy Education Environment Equipment Time People Lift Team Insufficient Use of Lift Equipment & Lift Team; Increased Incidence of Work-Related Injuries