Back Tools Research Articles

Day II: Friday, March 24, 2023; 5.30 PM Plumeria 3: Disability, Validation studies, Cancer: AB No: 4 To identify the contentment of commonly used low back pain disability tools in Indian context

Day II: Friday, March 24, 2023; 5.30 PM Plumeria 3: Disability, Validation studies, Cancer: AB No: 4 To identify the contentment of commonly used low back pain disability tools in Indian context

Day II: Friday, March 24, 2023; 5.30 PM Plumeria 3: Disability, Validation studies, Cancer: AB No: 4 To identify the contentment of commonly used low back pain disability tools in Indian context

Day II: Friday, March 24, 2023; 5.30 PM Plumeria 3: Disability, Validation studies, Cancer: AB No: 4 To identify the contentment of commonly used low back pain disability tools in Indian context

Assessment of back pain and disability status among automotive industry workers, in Ethiopia

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Back pain is a very common public health problem in the manufacturing industry and a major cause of disability that affects work performance and wellbeing. Currently, manufacturing sectors in Ethiopia, including automotive manufacturing is growing well but there is poor culture of work place safety. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of back pain and disability status at Bishoftu automotive industry workers.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> A cross sectional study was conducted among 412 workers in a period of February to May 2018. Simple random sampling technique was applied to select participants. Data was collected by face-to-face interview using standard Nordic and Oswestry back pain disability index tools. Analysis was done by using SPSS version 24. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine associations. </p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Prevalence of work related back pain among automotive production factory workers during last 12 months and last seven days were 51.7% and 25% respectively and related disability was 87%. The risk factors of the work related back pain that were identified include; work experience (11-15 years) AOR: 0.02, 95% CI (0.001-0.46), tasks that involve bending and twisting AOR: 2.03, 95% CI (1.19-3.45) and lifting of heavy loads AOR: 4.89, 95% CI (2.83-8.47).</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> High prevalence of back pain among automotive industry workers was seen. Furthermore, this study verified workers with back pain and more specifically those working in tasks that involve with the identified associated risk factors were suffer from disability. The problem should need more attention to promote the health and safety of workers.</p>

Understanding Causal Pathways for Occupationally Related Low Back Disorders

Extended Abstract Low back pain has been a leading cause of disability worldwide for nearly two decades (Hartvigsen et al 2018). In a study of US health care spending between 1996 through 2013, low back and neck pain was the health care condition with the highest increase in spending (Dieleman et. al. 2016). Continued increases in health care costs due to low back pain are not sustainable. Therefore, we need to develop better low back disorder prevention plans or tools. In order to prevent occupational low back disorders several tools (ie. NIOSH lifting guide, 3DSSPP, Snook Tables, Lumbar Motion Monitor risk model, REBA, LiFFT) have been developed to quantify the biomechanical or physical exposure risk. There are a multitude of risk factors for low back disorders including psychological, psychosocial, and personal factors none of which are included in the available ergonomics tools (Ferguson and Marras, 1997). The goal of this panel is to promote discussion of the biopsychosocial risk factors that lead to low back disorders and disability. Health care providers suggest that patient advocacy should include preventing prolonged work loss (Nguyen and Randolph, 2007) yet one of the most common personal risk factors of low back pain is previous history of low back pain. The prevention tools above do not include any personal risk factors regarding an individual’s low back health status or any other personal risk factor. Should a new low back injury prevention tool include some personal risk factors for previous low back injury or some other personal risk factor? What about a smoking status risk factor or since sitting is the new smoking what about a sitting risk factor? What about psychosocial factors such as supervisor support or co-worker support? What new tools might we need? What stakeholders to do we need or want at the table in order to develop a tool that will actually be effective and who will the users be? The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health funded several field studies in the 2000s to examine biomechanical exposure as risk factors of low back disorders. Several of the panelists had studies in the group. A consortium was formed to pool data where possible to increase statistical power to measure these more complex relationships. The common surveillance questionnaire measures of low back disorder included varying degrees of low back disorder severity. The surveillance measures in order from least severe to most severe were 1) any low back pain, 2) seeking medical care due to low back pain and 3) self-reported lost time due to low back pain in the past year. The panelists will be asked to address how the role of their specific topic may change as a function of the various surveillance measures. What does a new tool being developed really need to prevent (low back pain, seeking medical care, self-reported lost time, low back disability)? We will have each panel member discuss causality from several different multidimensional perspectives and will have an open debate/discussion. We will also allow time for audience perspectives Panelist Roles Dr. Jay Kapellusch will be discussing the role of psychophysics and the NIOSH lifting equation. Dr. Matthew S. Thiese will be examining the role of psychosocial risk factors. Dr. Kermit Davis will address interventions. Dr. Sean Gallagher will be probing specific physical injury mechanisms. Dr. William S. Marras will be presenting the multidimensional causal pathway for low back disorders.

Galaksio, a user friendly workflow-centric front end for Galaxy

There is a severe shortage of statisticians and bioinformaticians available in research. As universities fail to cover the increasing need of graduates with the necessary skills, ad hoc training and workshops have become commonplace but are insufficient to cover the needs. Technical solutions that distribute the workload more efficiently between researchers with a different education background (e.g., computer scientists and biologists) are therefore necessary to cover some of this shortage. Galaksio provides a workflow-centric graphical user interface for the Galaxy Workflow Management system easy to use for biologists and medical researchers who need to run routine tasks in bioinformatics. Combined with back end tools such as BioBlend, CloudMan and Pulsar, Galaksio provides a novel, layered approach to Galaxy making it easier to divide research tasks to researchers depending on their skills in interdisciplinary subjects such as bioinformatics and computational science. Galaksio is developed by the B3Africa project for the eB3Kit but functions as a stand-alone server that can be configured for to be connected to any Galaxy server using the Galaxy API. Galaksio can be downloaded at: https://github.com/fikipollo/galaksio .

Data security approach in cloud computing by using DOS attack

This paper analyzed the security measures in the collaborative environment, identified widespread DDoS attack implements and surveyed the current trace back tools to suggestion the actual attacker. Nearly, the most popular fears in cooperative environment are entrance controller attacks, SQL injection attacks and implementation of malevolent software, object reusability, camouflaged attacks, inhaling, nosey, and denial-of-service attacks (DoS). The elementary obligation of network based resource allocation includes providing dependable and reliable access of local as well as remote resources in collaborative application. But DDoS attacks are coming in the way of success of such resource centers. DDoS attack architecture can be classified as agent handler model and internet relay chat (IRC) model.

Comparing the STarT Back Screening Tool's Subgroup Allocation of Individual Patients With That of Independent Clinical Experts

The STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) is validated to subgroup primary care patients with back pain into risk groups relevant to initial decision-making. However, it remains unclear how the tool's allocation of individuals compares with subjective clinical decision-making. We evaluated agreement between clinicians and the SBST's allocation to risk subgroups, and explored reasons for differences observed. Twelve primary care back pain patients underwent a video-recorded clinical assessment. The SBST was completed on the same day. Clinical experts (3 general practitioners, 3 physiotherapists, and 3 pain management specialists) individually reviewed the patient videos (4 each), blind to SBST allocation. Their task was to subgroup patients into low, medium, or high-risk groups. Interrater agreement between clinicians was "fair" (κ=0.28), with consistent allocation between experts in 4 of 12 patients. There was observed agreement with the SBST in 17 of 36 cases (47%) and Cohen's weighted κ was 0.22, indicating fair agreement. Two reasons for differences emerged. Clinicians tailor their decisions according to patient expectations and demands for treatment and clinicians use knowledge of difficult life circumstances that may be unrelated back pain. Clinicians make inconsistent risk estimations for primary care patients with back pain when using intuition alone, with little agreement with a formal subgrouping tool. Unlike clinicians, the SBST could not make a sophisticated synthesis of patient preferences, expectations, and previous treatment history. Although acknowledging the limitations of back pain subgrouping tools, more research is needed to test whether their use improves consistency in primary care decision-making.

VALUE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN HIGH-TECH AND MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS

ABSTRACT Project management is an emerging professional discipline that has received considerable attention even in the boardroom. Senior corporate executives have been increasingly recognizing the value of project management to achieve rapid convergence to enterprise project development and performance. New techniques and tools, and even new mindsets have been brought into attention by both the practitioners and researchers. The true benefit of project management is in value creation from a timely and high quality delivery of a competitive product for the benefit of the customers in the marketplace. This special issue is focused on value creation through the use of various front end and back end project management tools in high-tech and manufacturing operations especially in the Asian context.

Outils de mesure des paramètres fonctionnels dans la lombalgie

Objectives. – To identify and compare low back pain functional assessment tools and to determine their characteristics and the selection criteria for their use. Materials and method. – We systematically searched Medline with the key words: low back pain, scale validity, questionnaire, assessment, outcome, and functional evaluation and with some data from the “ Guide des Outils de Mesure et d'Évaluation en Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation”, which allowed us to complete the search on specific tools including the Roland Disability Questionnaire, Dallas Pain Questionnaire, Quebec Back Pain Questionnaire, and Oswestry Back Pain Questionnaire. We restricted our analysis to studies about the psychometric properties of functional tools. Results. – We identified 19 scales or questionnaires, 9 specifically for low back pain and with a concept of functional incapacity. Four tools are recognised as having good psychometric properties and are widely used with linguistic adaptations in different countries. We also identified 10 generic tools proposed to assess outcome in low back pain, which are more conceptually linked to perceived health status, quality of life, and pain assessment. Conclusion. – A “gold standard” to evaluate disability in low back pain does not exist, but only 4 tools (the Dallas Pain Questionnaire, Roland Disability Questionnaire, Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire) demonstrated strong qualities (content and construct validity, feasibility, linguistic adaptation and international use).

Ergonomic Interventions for the Home Building Industry

Workers on framing carpentry crews in the home building industry are exposed to many of the recognized occupational risk factors for low back disorders. The focus of the current project was the design, fabrication and evaluation of a set of engineering controls designed to reduce the exposure to these risk factors. A biomechanical evaluation of the work activities of the workers on a framing crew was performed using the CABS methodology which employs three well-established low back stress assessment tools. From this evaluation a prioritized list of high-risk activities was developed. An iterative, participative engineering development process was employed to develop efficacious, cost-effective engineering controls. Described in this paper are three of these solutions: an extension handle for a nailgun, a pneumatic wall lift and a vertical material lift. A description of the impact that these tools had on low back stress and productivity are presented.