↓ Skip to main content

Influence of the Kinaesthetics care conception during patient handling on the development of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases – A scoping review

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Influence of the Kinaesthetics care conception during patient handling on the development of musculoskeletal complaints and diseases – A scoping review
Published in
Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12995-016-0113-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alice Freiberg, Maria Girbig, Ulrike Euler, Julia Scharfe, Albert Nienhaus, Sonja Freitag, Andreas Seidler

Abstract

The Kinaesthetics care conception is a nursing approach for patient handling which aims to prevent work-related complaints and diseases. The evidence about the influence of Kinaesthetics on musculoskeletal disorders among persons who handle patients is unclear to date. The purposes of the scoping review are to gain insight into the current state of research regarding the clinical effectiveness of Kinaesthetics (in terms of perceived exertion and musculoskeletal complaints) among persons who handle patients and to identify potential research gaps. A scoping review was conducted. The search strategy comprised a systematic search in electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL), a hand search, a fast forward search (Web of Science) and a Google scholar-search. The review process was carried out independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed for all studies using three methodological main categories (reporting quality, internal validity, external validity). Thirteen studies with different study designs were included. Seven studies investigated musculoskeletal complaints and nine studies the perceived exertion of nursing staff. Most studies were of very low methodology. Most studies reported a decrease of musculoskeletal complaints and perceived exertion due to Kinaesthetics. In conclusion, there is only little evidence of very low quality about the effectiveness of Kinaesthetics. Out of the studies it could be assumed that Kinaesthetics may decrease the patient handling related perceived exertion and musculoskeletal pain of persons who handle patients. But an overestimation of these results is likely, due to inadequate methodology of included studies. As a result, no clear recommendations about the effectiveness of the Kinaesthetics care conception can be made yet. Since a research gap was shown, further high quality intervention studies are necessary for clarifying the effectiveness of Kinaesthetics. CRD42015015811.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 3 5%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 17 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 14 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 17%
Computer Science 5 8%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 16 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 May 2016.
All research outputs
#16,862,429
of 24,792,566 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#223
of 411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,960
of 311,001 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,792,566 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 411 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,001 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.