Inadequate staffing and substandard patient handling equipment can get in the way of a nurse’s ability to care for patients. And then there is the human factor. Walk into any office break room, and you will find a wide variety of temperaments and personalities. In fact, sitcoms and movies that parody workplace culture are commonplace. In healthcare, however, where a patient’s welfare is in question, disruptive behavior is no laughing matter. HR problems can escalate quickly and can have dramatic negative impacts.
In 2018, the number of U.S. workers involved in strikes and lockouts was at its highest rate since 1986. This is despite the fact that percentage of U.S. workers who belong to a union continues to fall; the current rate is 10.5%.
A recent article in Endoscopy International raises the question, “Should the endoscopist be considered and trained like an athlete?” Although those outside the field of endoscopy might not immediately see the connection, because of the physical nature of a gastroenterologist’s job, the issue is an important one. And given the fact that one out of every two endoscopy staff will eventually suffer a work-related musculoskeletal (MSK) injury, the same question should be asked of nurses and nursing assistants.
Topics: colonoscopy, nurse, endoscopy, nursing, safe patient handling, patient safety, GI nursing, endoscopy nursing, looping in colonoscopy, endoscopist, injury endoscopist, nurse injury, endoscope, OSHA, endoscopy tech
The 2018 list of top 10 health technology hazards ranks the "failure to consistently and effectively reprocess flexible endoscopes" as #2. It may seem surprising, but when scopes are not thoroughly cleaned, dried, and stored, they can harbor Pseudomonas (associated with sepsis), salmonella, E. coli, and worse. These microorganisms can then be passed to patients undergoing an endoscopic procedure, like a colonoscopy, and to staff handling the scopes before, during, and after the case.
To attract and retain employees, some businesses offer perks ranging from on-site yoga to monthly karaoke parties. But once the novelty of these benefits wears off, do they really boost morale? Do employees really feel that the company understands their needs? Are the investments genuine? While some employees do appreciate such services, most would rather know that that their organization truly cares about them as individuals.
For years the American Medical Association has urged individuals to assess their risk for pre-diabetes; by being aware of their status or this pervasive disease, they can head off problems before they become serious. And the AMA does not stop there. It urges employers to encourage their workers to complete the health assessment, asserting that diabetes prevention is “good for business.”
If you have followed the previous four posts in our series on indirect costs of endoscopy staff injury, you know that musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) sustained on the job are costly. Case in point: the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) estimates that one of every three dollars spent on workers’ compensation claims originates with ergonomic problems, and costs related to MSDs amount to more than $54 billion per year. This article, which is the last in the series, looks at how MSDs affect an organization’s ability to comply with worker safety regulations and the financial consequences of violations.