A standardized protocol for the comprehensive assessment of dental hygiene work

Shawn C Roll, Mark E Hardison, Jane L Forrest, Nikki L Colclazier, Joyce Y Sumi, Nancy A Baker, Shawn C Roll, Mark E Hardison, Jane L Forrest, Nikki L Colclazier, Joyce Y Sumi, Nancy A Baker

Abstract

Background: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are prevalent in dental hygienists. Although engineering controls and ergonomic training is available, it is unclear why this intransigent problem continues. One possible barrier is that a comprehensive, standardized protocol for evaluating dental hygiene work does not exist.

Objective: This study aimed to generate a valid and reliable observational protocol for the assessment of dental hygiene work.

Methods: An iterative process was used to establish and refine an ecologically valid video acquisition and observation protocol to assess key activities, tasks, and performance components of dental hygiene work.

Results: Good inter-rater reliability was achieved across all variables when the final coding scheme was completed by three independent raters.

Conclusions: This work provides an exemplar of the process required to generate a comprehensive protocol for evaluating the work components of a particular job, and provides standardized nomenclature for use by scientists and practitioners interested in understanding and addressing the pervasive issue of work-related disorders in dental hygienists.

Keywords: Dental hygienists; clinical; ergonomics; research protocol.

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations of interest: None

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Initial camera set-up using two orthogonal views.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Final protocol for video camera and sample resulting views of the hygienist and patient from cameras placed overhead (A), in front (B), and lateral (C). For purposes of general representation in this paper, sample images have been cropped from the full field of view.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Sample visualizations from Round 1 of observational coding for activities (A), tasks (B), and sitting/standing (C) used to identify significant error and discrepancies in the coding process across the three raters, such as start/end (dashed circles) and intermittent periods of no-codes (brackets).

Source: PubMed

3
Prenumerera