Talk:Patient lift/Archive 1

Archive 1

This article should Merge with Patient lift

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was move HL to Sling lift -- Mirokado

---

Hoyer is a registered trademark and a brand name rather than a type of something. I think this article should merge with the existing article called Patient lift. Then this article should be deleted. 70.89.245.137 (talk) 22:59, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

The result of this suggestion appears to be that this article was renamed and PL was not merged. Mirokado (talk) 02:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge proposal: Patient lift and Sling lift

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was merge content to Patient Lift with Sling lift and Sit-to-stand lift redirecting to it -- Mirokado

---

It has been proposed again that Patient lift and Sling lift be merged.

• support I can see little justification for both articles. SL has PL as one of its bolded synonyms in the lead, and PL has a top right illustration of what I presume is an SL. SL has an illustration of a Hoyer lift where no sling is visible...

suggestion SL is the more mature article, with ten inline references (although more are needed.) PL has no references at all (apart from a link to a patent which is already in SL). I suggest go through PL to identify any content not already in SL and incorporate it in SL provided references for the new content can be found. Kikodawgzzz, you have made this proposal, I suggest that you do this if the move is agreed to. – Mirokado (talk) 02:40, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

---

I do not agree the two articles should be merged since a sit-to-stand lift is NOT a sling-lift but it is a patient lift. This single item differentiates the two classes of equipment conceptually. The patient lift is a larger set because of this and the sling lift should be kept as a separate category for devices that ONLY use slings. JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.91.23.230 (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for the response. We certainly need to do something with these articles, however, since there is no article that I can find for a sit-to-stand lift (can you find one?), only one very short paragraph about it in PL, and no references (or indeed wikilinks) in that article.
• If PL is to stay as a separate article in any form, it needs to be rewritten so that it has an introduction and sections for each type of lift, sufficient references and/or wikilinks and perhaps one or two pictures of other sorts of lift. Can you volunteer to do that?
• Does Sit-to-stand lift deserve an article of its own? If so, can you volunteer to write it? With suitable references of course, and a picture if possible as I cannot currently visualise what is special about a sit-to-stand lift.
• Any section in the rewritten PL should either be a summary of the corresponding main article with a link, or rather longer than just a summary with full references and preferably a picture.
• If not merged, PL will be a candidate for deletion in its current form because it does not establish notability for the very small amount of information not already in the other article. -- Mirokado (talk) 00:25, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

• support. I know I am the original suggester of the merger but Mirokado just now asked me to pop by here and offer my voice, so I'm reiterating my argument for a merger, this time by saying I agree with the tenets of the above reasoning he's outlined, rather than just the more general emotive visceral response I got when I first compared these articles a few days ago. Mirokado's reasoning fleshes out in words what I've basically been thinking already. I support the merger on the grounds he's outlined. Kikodawgzzz (talk) 01:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

• Support They ARE exactly the same thing. Tatterfly (talk) 04:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

As I mentioned earlier, the PL is the more general category since it includes both sling lifts and sit-to-stand lifts. If the articles are merged, I recommend a section on "sling lifts" (those that use slings, i.e., floor lifts, ceiling lifts, and A-frame lifts), and a different section on "non-sling lifts" (sit-to-stand lifts which use belts, harnesses, or "vests" which are positioned under the arms, NOT slings). I wrote a significant portion of both these articles, and I think that would be an acceptable compromise. The Sling Lift article is more mature and detailed. So the contents of the SL (Hoyer lift) article should replace the PL article, and the portion of the PL article that is unique should be added to the new PL contents. I would be willing to do this. JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.91.41.241 (talk) 21:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea and it will be great if you an original author can do that editing. In order to avoid fragmenting the change histories, I will have a look at renaming so that the mature content ends up in the right place. I will post again this evening, off to work now. Mirokado (talk) 09:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

I will park the current PL content by moving it to Sit-to-stand lift and updating the move notice there, then move SL to PL over redirect. Once the new PL is updated with the extra sections and content from the new StsL we can turn StsL into a redirect to PL. — Mirokado (talk) 17:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC) — add wl Mirokado (talk) 17:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Har. I cannot move over redirect as I had expected, so I am adding a move request below. I think you could start updating the content of this article on the assumption that the move will happen. — Mirokado (talk) 17:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Continuing the discussion in new section #After the merge. – Mirokado (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: seems to have been carried out Kotniski (talk) 08:24, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

---

{{Patient lift|Preparing for content merge to this new name, see Talk:Sling lift#Merge proposal: Patient lift and Sling lift which explains.}}

Sling lift → Patient lift — Preparing for content merge to this new name, see Talk:Sling lift#Merge proposal: Patient lift and Sling lift which explains. Mirokado (talk) 17:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

I will check to see when the article is updated and add the sit-to-stand section if I see it is missing - JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.91.45.149 (talk) 03:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

After the merge

I have finished adding the relevant sections from the "sit-to-stand" lift page to the "sling lift" or "patient lift" wiki page. I believe the sit-to-stand page can now be deleted. Comment or questions are welcome. JD —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.91.41.245 (talk) 02:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for those updates. I have added a couple more sentences and the picture from StsL and reorganised the sections a bit. Now we need to make the article look as if it was always designed as a whole, so some further changes will be needed as part of normal improvement. – Mirokado (talk) 20:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Legal issues

The examples given in the "legal issues" section, are not directly related to patient lifts. All those examples start with a patient lift accident, but charges and allegations are not about the lift: they are about improper care of the injured patient in the aftermath of the accident.

The 1999 accident might be an exception, because the issue is a lift malfunctioning, although it isn't explained in the article, and as far as I can see in the reference, the matter it's not specially specific of patient lifts.--Pere prlpz (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Unsourced 1

Moving this here until it can be sourced and verified, per WP:VERIFY

Patients who have medical conditions that do not allow them to be bent and compressed by the sling as they are hoisted (i.e., cannot withstand "vertical transfer") will require specialised slings which can lift horizontally, or use other assistive devices for transfer. The other types of transfer device which allow for lateral or supine (supine position) transfer are stretcher chairs (also called transfer or convertible chairs) that allow patients to be slid or dragged from the bed onto a mobile stretcher that then converts to a mobile chair, and inflatable sliding mats which use air bearing technology to reduce friction during lateral transfer (see Lateral Patient Air Transfer). Other less expensive alternatives are disposable or washable sliding sheets and sliding boards.

The term sling lift is also known as Hoyer Lift which refers to the oldest and most common brand name in the United States. The basic design for the sling lift was patented in 1955 by R.R. Stratton, and titled "Floor Crane with Adjustable Legs" (US 2706120 ). According to the patent, the lift's design was based on a similar device used in "automotive repair shops" which is described as a "floor crane available for lifting engines and other heavy parts". The adjustable "wide-spread legs" of the crane were needed to make the device maneuverable when the legs are parallel to each other but stable under heavy load when they are spread out at an angle. Modern floor lifts maintain the basic elements of the original 1950s design described in the patent.

Use of the a sling lift involves placing a special piece of fabric, called a sling, under the patient (usually made of woven nylon, cotton, or a similar material to a modern hammock), which can hold the weight of the patient while suspended in air. The fabric is attached to a series of hooks or clips.

Some variations of the sling involve the placement of a padded sling under the patient. When the patient is elevated, these pads hold the patient in place. Other kinds of specialized slings are toileting slings, amputee slings, quadriplegic slings (contain additional head support), showering slings and repositioning slings (for turning or sliding patients in bed), disposable slings (for enhanced infection control), and stretcher slings (for supine transfer). It is important that medical staff do an assessment of the patient's size, weight, and medical condition in order to select the proper sling to avoid injuring the patient during transfer. To reduce the risk of cross infection which is of critical importance in hospitals, the slings are often disposable or patient specific.

One limitation of common slings is that they bend and compress the patient during transfer which can be difficult for patients with painful medical conditions. Most patients must also be "log rolled" onto the sling prior to being hoisted which makes the transfer process a more complex activity. Nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants often receive specialized training in order to use the patient lift safely and effectively.

Floor sling lifts usually have a wheeled base that requires additional space on the side of the patient's bed during transfer. The ceiling lift eliminates this space issue because the patient is supported by ceiling tracks instead of by the wheeled base. Ceiling lifts use the same sling technology as floor sling lifts. However, they usually have a "track system" attached to the ceiling for horizontal movement of the patient within the patient's room and often into an adjoining bathroom. Ceiling lifts also use an overhead electric motor (i.e., they are not hydraulic) controlled by a hand-held set of push buttons to raise and lower the patient. In most cases, the same overhead motor is used to move the patient horizontally, but such movement is limited by the placement of the overhead ceiling track system. Two types of systems are available, a straight rail system, or a traverse system, consisting of two primary rails and a secondary rail. The traversing system allows for complete 360 degree movement in the track area. Today, overhead or ceiling lifts, are becoming more common and are often installed when new hospitals, nursing homes, etc. are built.

There are many important benefits of ceiling lifts, both for the caregiver and for the patient, and for the facility. For the caregiver, the biggest benefit is reducing if not eliminating musculoskeletal injuries (MSD's), many of which can be career ending. In the US, caregivers have the highest MSD rate of all professions, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Also, since the average age of nurses in the US is climbing, fewer and fewer can handle the physical demands required for caring for patients. Ceiling lifts promote caregivers safety and career longevity. For the patient, the ability of a ceiling lift to reposition them and move them from bed to chair results in reduced incidence of pressure ulcers and pneumonia, less need for pain medication during such transfers, safer transfers and overall faster recovery. For the facility, their patients have better outcomes typically resulting in better economics (and fewer penalties resulting from "never events" like bed sores which ceiling lifts help eliminate), their staff have fewer injuries and since it takes one staff member versus 2-3 to move a patient from bed to chair even for a patient on a ventilator, the staff have significant productivity gains. So the return on investment for a functioning ceiling lift program is very strong which explains why the use of ceiling lifts are the standard of care in Canada, Europe and Australia.

Modular free-standing (or A-frame) overhead track systems are also available. These systems are less expensive than permanent ceiling track installations. The can also be quickly disassembled and moved from room to room as required. These systems are known as gantry hoists and are particularly useful for individuals who are travelling.

Sling lifts (both ceiling lifts and floor lifts) are available with an integrated patient scale which saves time since the patient can be weighed during transfer.

-- Jytdog (talk) 23:09, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced 2

As above, needs to be verified from reliable sources and sources provided, before being in the article, per WP:VERIFY

Sit-to-stand lift

Sit-to-stand lifts are designed to help patients who lack the strength or muscle control to rise to a standing position from a bed, wheelchair, chair, or commode. They use straps, vests, or belts (as opposed to slings) positioned around the patient's back usually fitting under their arms. They are therefore technically not "sling lifts" which are used for vertical patient transfer. Sit-to-stand lifts fix the patient legs in position exerting pressure on the patient's calves as the belt or strap is tightened by the lift mechanism. This tightening gradually moves the patient's body diagonally into a standing position. Standing is medically beneficial to reduce conditions such as osteoporosis which can occur when a disabled patient's bones weaken over time because they are no longer used support the patient's weight.

Sit-to-stand devices are designed to transfer a patient between two seating surfaces. These include surfaces such as a commode, shower or transfer bench, wheelchair, chair, and bedside or mattress. The physical demands required to transfer a patient using a sit-to-stand device are significantly less than manually performing a stand-and-pivot transfer thus decreasing the chances of caregiver back or shoulder overexertion injuries. Since sit-to-stand lifts typically have a smaller base than floor sling lifts, they can more easily fit and maneuver a patient into tight spaces such as bath and shower rooms.

The limitations of sit-to-stand lifts is that patients must be able to first sit up and second to physically support their own weight while in a standing position in order to use these devices.

- Jytdog (talk) 23:11, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced 3 - The role of Safe Patient Handling programs

As above, needs to be verified from reliable sources and sources provided, before being in the article, per WP:VERIFY

The role of Safe Patient Handling programs

There has been considerable effort put forth by nursing advocacy groups to encourage hospitals and nursing homes to adopt "zero-lift" "minimal lift" or "no-lift" programs in order to prevent orthopedic injuries in healthcare workers. However such Safe Patient Handling and Movement (SPHM) programs, which require the use of mechanical lifting aids, are sometimes difficult to implement, and require change management practices to encourage sustainable culture change. One approach is to create a facility "lift team" that is on call and specializes in moving patients. This eliminates a number of issues mentioned above since the lift team brings the lift with them to the patient's room, maintains it in proper working order, is knowledgeable in the use of the lift, has special expertise in sling selection, and can move patients quickly and safely. The downside of the lift team is that the team(s) may be busy when needed, and patients who need to be mobilized quickly to meet schedules must wait for a team to become available, leaving the bedside caregivers unprepared and untrained for safe patient handling and mobility, thus increasing risk of injury to patients and caregivers. Another risk is that the risk of injury is often shifted to the lift team, but still exists. Finally, without having formal medical or clinical training, a lift team may injure a patient if the nurse is not present, for example, a patient with weight bearing or surgical precautions may be put into positions or weight bearing positions which contradict the patients clinical orders.

Best Practice SPHM programs, while they may use outside consultants, trainers, or materials, are owned and established "in-house" and based on a champion training model. Often a facility will have a SPHM Coordinator or Specialist. Typically this is a nurse or therapy professional with certification in safe patient handling, (i.e. Certified Safe Patient Handling Professional: CSPHP, or Certified Safe Patient Handling Associate: CSPHA) This designation is granted through the Association of Safe Patient Handling. The SPHM Coordinator or Specialist will lead the SPHM efforts, often training unit based SPHM Champions, super-users, coaches, or unit peer leaders. Successful programs will have a SPHM Policy, SPHM Equipment, SPHM Nursing Mobility Assessment (e.g.B.M.A.T- Bedside Mobility Assessment Tool), SPHM Education, and an organized team. The team will set goals, consult on recommendations, build education, make decisions about SPHM budget and equipment and vendor selection.

Normally, much consideration is given to the patient’s comfort and wellbeing during the transfer process. For some patients, the use of a patient lift is more dignified than transferring a patient manually while some consider being hoisted in a sling less dignified. Lifts can enable families or caregivers to mobilize patients in the home setting rather than forcing patients to be relocated to an institutional setting. The inability to mobilize patients at home is one of the primary reasons that patients find it necessary to leave the home environment and enter a nursing home when they become temporarily or permanently disabled.

Safe patient handling and mobility is especially important in the area of bariatric care. Bariatric patients (the definition is variable depending on the organization, but typically sets a weight limit of 300-500lbs) require additional staff training and specialized equipment for transfer, showering, toileting, etc.

Assessing the impact of prevention efforts, such as Safe Patient Handling programs, on occupational health and safety over time is important. Monitoring injury and illness trends is essential to identifying target interventions to improve occupational safety and health. The Occupational Health Safety Network (OHSN) is a secure electronic surveillance system developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) to address health and safety risks among health care personnel. Hospitals and other healthcare facilities can upload the occupational injury data they already collect to the secure database for analysis and benchmarking with other de-identified facilities. NIOSH works with OHSN participants in identifying and implementing timely and targeted interventions. OHSN modules currently focus on three high risk and preventable events that can lead to injuries or musculoskeletal disorders among healthcare personnel: musculoskeletal injuries from patient handling activities; slips, trips, and falls; and workplace violence. OHSN enrollment is open to all healthcare facilities.

-- Jytdog (talk) 23:12, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced 4 - Legal issues

This content needs to be sourced and checked for support by reliable sources, per WP:VERIFY

There are also legal issues for facilities who don't provide adequate mechanical lifting equipment to their staff. Approximately ten states have adopted legislation mandating that healthcare facilities provide lifting equipment for their staff and there is federal legislation pending. And in 2015, an investigative report for Public Radio did a series of articles on how poorly many hospitals are protecting their nurses from back injuries due to manual lifting vs using mechanical floor or ceiling lifts. Therefore there is a legal and regulatory movement underway to demand more action by employers of nurses to ensure they have the proper equipment and training to safely lift and transfer their patietns.

-- Jytdog (talk) 23:15, 1 May 2016 (UTC)