美国建筑工人的非药物止痛方法:一项横断面试点研究。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH American journal of industrial medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1002/ajim.23630
Aurora B Le, Abas Shkembi, G Scott Earnest, Elizabeth Garza, Douglas Trout, Sang D Choi
{"title":"美国建筑工人的非药物止痛方法:一项横断面试点研究。","authors":"Aurora B Le, Abas Shkembi, G Scott Earnest, Elizabeth Garza, Douglas Trout, Sang D Choi","doi":"10.1002/ajim.23630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>U.S. construction workers experience high rates of injury that can lead to chronic pain. This pilot study examined nonpharmacological (without medication prescribed by healthcare provider) and pharmacological (e.g., prescription opioids) pain management approaches used by construction workers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of U.S. construction workers was surveyed, in partnership with the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Construction Sector Program. Differences in familiarity and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological pain management approaches, by demographics, were assessed using logistic regression models. A boosted regression tree model examined the most influential factors related to pharmacological pain management use, and potential reductions in use were counterfactually modeled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 166 (85%) of 195 participants reporting pain/discomfort in the last year, 72% reported using pharmacological pain management approaches, including 19% using opioids. There were significant differences in familiarity with nonpharmacological approaches by gender, education, work experience, and job title. Among 37 factors that predicted using pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management approaches, training on the risks of opioids, job benefits for unpaid leave and paid disability, and familiarity with music therapy, meditation or mindful breathing, and body scans were among the most important predictors of potentially reducing use of pharmacological approaches. Providing these nonpharmacological approaches to workers could result in an estimated 23% (95% CI: 16%-30%) reduction in pharmacological pain management approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This pilot study suggests specific factors related to training, job benefits, and worker familiarity with nonpharmacological pain management approaches influence use of these approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nonpharmacological pain management approaches among U.S. construction workers: A cross-sectional pilot study.\",\"authors\":\"Aurora B Le, Abas Shkembi, G Scott Earnest, Elizabeth Garza, Douglas Trout, Sang D Choi\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ajim.23630\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>U.S. construction workers experience high rates of injury that can lead to chronic pain. This pilot study examined nonpharmacological (without medication prescribed by healthcare provider) and pharmacological (e.g., prescription opioids) pain management approaches used by construction workers.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of U.S. construction workers was surveyed, in partnership with the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Construction Sector Program. Differences in familiarity and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological pain management approaches, by demographics, were assessed using logistic regression models. A boosted regression tree model examined the most influential factors related to pharmacological pain management use, and potential reductions in use were counterfactually modeled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 166 (85%) of 195 participants reporting pain/discomfort in the last year, 72% reported using pharmacological pain management approaches, including 19% using opioids. There were significant differences in familiarity with nonpharmacological approaches by gender, education, work experience, and job title. Among 37 factors that predicted using pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management approaches, training on the risks of opioids, job benefits for unpaid leave and paid disability, and familiarity with music therapy, meditation or mindful breathing, and body scans were among the most important predictors of potentially reducing use of pharmacological approaches. Providing these nonpharmacological approaches to workers could result in an estimated 23% (95% CI: 16%-30%) reduction in pharmacological pain management approaches.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This pilot study suggests specific factors related to training, job benefits, and worker familiarity with nonpharmacological pain management approaches influence use of these approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7873,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of industrial medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of industrial medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23630\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.23630","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:美国建筑工人的受伤率很高,这可能会导致慢性疼痛。这项试点研究考察了建筑工人使用的非药物(无医疗保健提供者开具的药物)和药物(如处方阿片类药物)止痛方法:方法:与美国国家职业安全与健康研究所(NIOSH)建筑行业计划合作,对美国建筑工人进行了方便抽样调查。使用逻辑回归模型评估了不同人口统计学特征的非药物和药物止痛方法的熟悉程度和使用情况差异。增强回归树模型研究了与药物止痛方法使用相关的最有影响力的因素,并对可能减少药物止痛方法使用的情况进行了反事实建模:在 195 名报告去年有疼痛/不适症状的参与者中,有 166 人(85%)报告使用了药物止痛方法,其中 19% 使用了阿片类药物。不同性别、教育程度、工作经验和职称的人对非药物止痛方法的熟悉程度存在明显差异。在预测使用药物和非药物止痛方法的 37 个因素中,关于阿片类药物风险的培训、无薪假期和带薪残疾的工作福利,以及对音乐疗法、冥想或正念呼吸和身体扫描的熟悉程度,是预测可能减少使用药物止痛方法的最重要因素。如果向工人提供这些非药物治疗方法,估计可以减少23%(95% CI:16%-30%)的药物止痛治疗:这项试点研究表明,与培训、工作福利和工人对非药物止痛方法的熟悉程度有关的特定因素会影响这些方法的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Nonpharmacological pain management approaches among U.S. construction workers: A cross-sectional pilot study.

Background: U.S. construction workers experience high rates of injury that can lead to chronic pain. This pilot study examined nonpharmacological (without medication prescribed by healthcare provider) and pharmacological (e.g., prescription opioids) pain management approaches used by construction workers.

Methods: A convenience sample of U.S. construction workers was surveyed, in partnership with the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Construction Sector Program. Differences in familiarity and use of nonpharmacological and pharmacological pain management approaches, by demographics, were assessed using logistic regression models. A boosted regression tree model examined the most influential factors related to pharmacological pain management use, and potential reductions in use were counterfactually modeled.

Results: Of 166 (85%) of 195 participants reporting pain/discomfort in the last year, 72% reported using pharmacological pain management approaches, including 19% using opioids. There were significant differences in familiarity with nonpharmacological approaches by gender, education, work experience, and job title. Among 37 factors that predicted using pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain management approaches, training on the risks of opioids, job benefits for unpaid leave and paid disability, and familiarity with music therapy, meditation or mindful breathing, and body scans were among the most important predictors of potentially reducing use of pharmacological approaches. Providing these nonpharmacological approaches to workers could result in an estimated 23% (95% CI: 16%-30%) reduction in pharmacological pain management approaches.

Conclusion: This pilot study suggests specific factors related to training, job benefits, and worker familiarity with nonpharmacological pain management approaches influence use of these approaches.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
期刊最新文献
A longitudinal pre-post study: An evaluation of the Department of the Air Force bundled occupational fall prevention efforts. Issue Information Essential(ly forgotten) workers: Latine youth farmworkers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Surveillance of asbestos related disease among workers enrolled in an exposure registry. Prevalence of COVID-19 and Long COVID by industry and occupation: Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System 2022.
×
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