Slip-resistant footwear to reduce slips among health-care workers: the SSHeW RCT

S. Cockayne, C. Fairhurst, Michael Zand, G. Frost, M. Liddle, Rachel Cunningham-Burley, C. Hewitt, H. Iles-Smith, L. Green, Emily Bain, Misbah Mogradia, D. Torgerson
{"title":"Slip-resistant footwear to reduce slips among health-care workers: the SSHeW RCT","authors":"S. Cockayne, C. Fairhurst, Michael Zand, G. Frost, M. Liddle, Rachel Cunningham-Burley, C. Hewitt, H. Iles-Smith, L. Green, Emily Bain, Misbah Mogradia, D. Torgerson","doi":"10.3310/PHR09030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n In Great Britain, 100,000 injuries due to slips, trips and falls on the level (as opposed to falls from a height, e.g. a ladder) occur in the workplace each year. They are the most common cause of non-fatal injury in the workplace, accounting for 30% of all those injuries reported to the Health and Safety Executive. Nearly 1 million working days are lost because of slips, trips and falls each year.\n \n \n \n To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 5-star, GRIP-rated, slip-resistant footwear in preventing slips in the workplace compared with usual footwear.\n \n \n \n A two-arm, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation and qualitative study.\n \n \n \n Seven NHS trusts in England.\n \n \n \n NHS staff aged ≥ 18 years, working at least 22.5 hours per week in clinical, general or catering areas who owned a mobile phone. Staff required to wear protective footwear were excluded.\n \n \n \n Intervention participants were offered 5-star, GRIP-rated, slip-resistant footwear. The waiting list control group were asked to wear their usual work shoes for the duration of the study and were offered the trial footwear at the end of their participation.\n \n \n \n The primary outcome was the incidence rate of self-reported slips in the workplace over 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the incidence rate of falls either resulting from a slip or not resulting from a slip, proportion of participants reporting a slip, fall or fracture, time to first slip and fall, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness.\n \n \n \n A total of 4553 eligible NHS staff were randomised (2275 to the intervention arm and 2278 to the control arm). In total, 6743 slips were reported [2633 in the intervention group (mean 1.16 per participant, range 0–36 per participant) and 4110 in the control group (mean 1.80 per participant, range 0–83 per participant)]. There was a statistically significant reduction in the slip rate in the intervention group relative to the control group (incidence rate ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.70; p < 0.001). Statistically significant reductions were observed in falls from a slip (incidence rate ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.92; p = 0.03), the proportion of participants who reported a slip (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.66; p < 0.001) or fall (odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.99; p = 0.04) and the time to first slip (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.80; p < 0.001). Half of the intervention participants wore the shoes all the time at work. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year in the base case was £38,900 from the NHS perspective and –£60,400 (i.e. cost saving) from the societal perspective.\n \n \n \n This was an unblinded trial in which outcome data were participant self-reported, which may have led to inaccuracies in the reported slip data. Exposure to the trial footwear was lower than hoped.\n \n \n \n The offer and provision of 5-star, GRIP-rated footwear reduced slips in the workplace, was acceptable to participants and could be cost-effective.\n \n \n \n Replication of the study within other settings may be required to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in other environments settings, such as catering and factories.\n \n \n \n Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33051393.\n \n \n \n This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 3. See the NIHR Public Journals Library website for further project information. The Health and Safety Executive provided some research costs.\n","PeriodicalId":32306,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Research","volume":"9 1","pages":"1-150"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/PHR09030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In Great Britain, 100,000 injuries due to slips, trips and falls on the level (as opposed to falls from a height, e.g. a ladder) occur in the workplace each year. They are the most common cause of non-fatal injury in the workplace, accounting for 30% of all those injuries reported to the Health and Safety Executive. Nearly 1 million working days are lost because of slips, trips and falls each year. To assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 5-star, GRIP-rated, slip-resistant footwear in preventing slips in the workplace compared with usual footwear. A two-arm, multicentre, randomised controlled trial with an economic evaluation and qualitative study. Seven NHS trusts in England. NHS staff aged ≥ 18 years, working at least 22.5 hours per week in clinical, general or catering areas who owned a mobile phone. Staff required to wear protective footwear were excluded. Intervention participants were offered 5-star, GRIP-rated, slip-resistant footwear. The waiting list control group were asked to wear their usual work shoes for the duration of the study and were offered the trial footwear at the end of their participation. The primary outcome was the incidence rate of self-reported slips in the workplace over 14 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the incidence rate of falls either resulting from a slip or not resulting from a slip, proportion of participants reporting a slip, fall or fracture, time to first slip and fall, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. A total of 4553 eligible NHS staff were randomised (2275 to the intervention arm and 2278 to the control arm). In total, 6743 slips were reported [2633 in the intervention group (mean 1.16 per participant, range 0–36 per participant) and 4110 in the control group (mean 1.80 per participant, range 0–83 per participant)]. There was a statistically significant reduction in the slip rate in the intervention group relative to the control group (incidence rate ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.70; p < 0.001). Statistically significant reductions were observed in falls from a slip (incidence rate ratio 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.92; p = 0.03), the proportion of participants who reported a slip (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.66; p < 0.001) or fall (odds ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.54 to 0.99; p = 0.04) and the time to first slip (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.80; p < 0.001). Half of the intervention participants wore the shoes all the time at work. Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year in the base case was £38,900 from the NHS perspective and –£60,400 (i.e. cost saving) from the societal perspective. This was an unblinded trial in which outcome data were participant self-reported, which may have led to inaccuracies in the reported slip data. Exposure to the trial footwear was lower than hoped. The offer and provision of 5-star, GRIP-rated footwear reduced slips in the workplace, was acceptable to participants and could be cost-effective. Replication of the study within other settings may be required to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness in other environments settings, such as catering and factories. Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN33051393. This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Health Research programme and will be published in full in Public Health Research; Vol. 9, No. 3. See the NIHR Public Journals Library website for further project information. The Health and Safety Executive provided some research costs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减少卫生保健工作者滑倒的防滑鞋:sshow随机对照试验
在英国,每年有10万人在工作场所因滑倒、绊倒和摔倒(而不是从高处坠落,如梯子)而受伤。它们是工作场所非致命伤害的最常见原因,占向健康与安全执行局报告的所有伤害的30%。每年有近100万个工作日因滑倒、绊倒和跌倒而损失。与普通鞋类相比,评估五星级GRIP级防滑鞋在预防工作场所滑倒方面的临床有效性和成本效益。一项具有经济评估和定性研究的双臂、多中心、随机对照试验。英国的七个NHS信托基金。NHS工作人员年龄≥ 18岁,每周至少在临床、普通或餐饮领域工作22.5小时,拥有手机。要求穿防护鞋的工作人员被排除在外。干预参与者被提供了五星级、GRIP评级的防滑鞋。等待名单对照组被要求在研究期间穿上他们通常的工作鞋,并在参与结束时获得试验鞋。主要结果是14周内工作场所自我报告失误的发生率。次要结果包括由滑倒或非滑倒引起的跌倒发生率、报告滑倒、跌倒或骨折的参与者比例、首次滑倒和跌倒的时间、与健康相关的生活质量和成本效益。共有4553名符合条件的NHS工作人员被随机分配(2275人分配给干预组,2278人分配给对照组)。总共报告了6743次失误【干预组2633次(平均每位参与者1.16次,范围0-36次),对照组4110次(平均每场参与者1.80次,幅度0-83次)】。与对照组相比,干预组的滑动率在统计学上显著降低(发病率比0.63,95%置信区间0.57至0.70;p < 0.001)。从统计学上观察到从滑倒中跌倒的人数显著减少(发病率比0.51,95%置信区间0.28-0.92;p = 0.03),报告失误的参与者比例(比值比0.58,95%置信区间0.50至0.66;p < 0.001)或跌倒(比值比0.73,95%置信区间0.54至0.99;p = 0.04)和第一次滑动的时间(风险比0.73,95%置信区间0.67至0.80;p < 0.001)。一半的干预参与者在工作时一直穿着这双鞋。从NHS的角度来看,基本情况下每个质量调整生命年的增量成本为38900英镑,从社会的角度来看为60400英镑(即成本节约)。这是一项非盲试验,结果数据是参与者自我报告的,这可能导致报告的滑动数据不准确。试验鞋的暴露量低于预期。提供和提供五星级GRIP级鞋类减少了工作场所的打滑,参与者可以接受,并且具有成本效益。可能需要在其他环境中复制该研究,以评估在其他环境(如餐饮和工厂)中的临床有效性和成本效益。当前对照试验ISRCTN33051393。该项目由国家卫生研究所公共卫生研究计划资助,并将在《公共卫生研究》上全文发表;第9卷第3期。有关更多项目信息,请访问美国国立卫生研究院公共期刊图书馆网站。健康与安全执行局提供了一些研究费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
46 weeks
期刊最新文献
Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis of the Nose and Maxilla: A Rare Presentation. Behavioural intervention to reduce sexually transmitted infections in people aged 16–24 years in the UK: the safetxt RCT A group-based exercise and behavioural maintenance intervention for adults over 65 years with mobility limitations: the REACT RCT Feasibility of a theory-based intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour among contact centre staff: the SUH stepped-wedge cluster RCT A multicomponent structured health behaviour intervention to improve physical activity in long-distance HGV drivers: the SHIFT cluster RCT
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1