Purpose and background. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders, particularly back pain, are a significant issue for healthcare workers, with patient handling being the most frequently reported risk factor. Patient handling is often performed without assistive devices or equipment, which can cause healthcare staff to maintain awkward postures or experience high loads. This review aimed to comprehensively map the literature surrounding manual patient handling (without assistive devices) by healthcare practitioners to identify the current evidence-base on moving and handling of patients and explore what primary research had been conducted. Methods and results. JBI methodology for scoping reviews and an a priori registered protocol (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/8PR7A) was followed and AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus and EMBASE databases were searched. Literature published in English between 2002 and 2021 was included. Forty-nine records were included: 36 primary research studies, 1 systematic review and 12 ‘other’ including narrative and government reports. Primary research predominantly used observational cross-sectional designs (n = 21 studies). Most studies took place in hospitals (n = 13) and laboratories (n = 12). Nurses formed the largest population group (n = 13), with very little research on physiotherapists and other allied health professionals. Conclusion. This scoping review comprehensively reviewed the available literature in the area. Most of the included primary research was observational. Nurses were often investigated in hospitals and laboratories. Qualitative research investigating moving and handling and further biomechanical investigation into therapeutic handling by healthcare staff were identified as areas for further research. Conflicts of interest. None. Sources of funding. None. This work has been published in Physiotherapy: Johnson, K., Swinton, P., Pavlova, A. and Cooper, K., 2023. Manual patient handling in the healthcare setting: a scoping review. Physiotherapy. (120) 60–77 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2023.06.003

Purpose. The purpose of this study was to discover if student led clinics (SLC) are feasible delivery mechanisms for Low back pain (LBP) self-management support and to develop a service model. Background. LBP is the most commonly reported musculoskeletal disorder worldwide. The increasing service and workforce demands of LBP are challenging for providers and policy makers. self-management is appropriate for many people living with LBP yet guidance for self-management is lacking. One potential delivery mechanism is through SLC. These are ‘clinics’ run by students, supervised by clinicians. Methods and Results. A scoping review has found that SLC can be effective for supporting self-management of various long-term conditions and can provide cost benefits compared with traditional clinical services. In principle, their use for providing LBP services could have similar advantages as well as mitigating the clinical placement shortage. A further scoping review of self-management support for LBP was used to develop a model for student-led LBP clinics. The proposed model is a student led LBP supported self-management service. The service users will be triaged using the Psychosocial Flags Framework to identify obstacles to participation, followed by 1–6 sessions of self-management support comprising of; 1) empathetic listening and education to build a therapeutic relationship and to dispel LBP myths; 2) collaboratively setting meaningful goals; 3) imparting knowledge and skills to overcome the identified obstacles; 4) developing an evidence-informed plan for self-management, agreed with relevant stakeholders. Conclusion. Previous experience and the evidence-base suggest that SLC are feasible for delivering self-management support for LBP. Conflicts of interest: No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding: No funding obtained

Background. A local authority approached us, for a cost-beneficial solution to their increasing low back pain referrals. We proposed developing a student-led clinic – an intervention delivered by students but supervised by clinicians. We then conducted scoping reviews on student-led clinics in the management of health conditions and on the self-management of back pain. The findings suggested that student-led self-management interventions for low back health should be feasible. The next step was to co-construct the intervention with key stakeholders. Co-Construction. A hybrid of Action Research and Design Science methodology was used to co-construct the intervention with five key stakeholder groups (council staff, managers and human resources, employee healthcare, students, and lecturers). Three rounds of focus groups explored the ‘problem’, the possible solutions, the process, and the content. Themes were taken from each of these focus groups and the similarities and differences were analysed. This analysis and subsequent synthesis with the evidence base created potential intervention models, which were discussed and refined with the stakeholder groups. Intervention. The proposed intervention is focused on providing evidence informed biopsychosocial support for work-relevant back pain, based on identifying obstacles and solutions to improve coping with back health at work. An onboarding workshop challenges positively their thinking around back pain and work. This is followed by up to three 1:1 sessions that support the individual to identify work-relevant back health goals and agree a plan to achieve them using techniques to facilitate behaviour change. Conclusion. The intervention is evidence informed and aims to address the prioritised needs of the stakeholders. Conflicts of interest. No conflicts of interest. Sources of funding. National Health Service Education

Background:. Low back pain (LBP) is the most common symptom encountered by osteopaths in the UK and affects a third of the UK population each year. Guidelines recommend using the biopsychosocial (BPS) model for non-specific LBP but it remains unclear what the BPS model actually is and how it applies in osteopathy. The aim of this study was to define the factors included in a BPS approach for non-specific LBP in a manual therapy using a systematic search and scoping review. Methods:. An online search was performed on seven electronic databases. Guidelines and systematic reviews published after 2004 were included. 10% of the articles randomly selected were analysed by second reviewer to assess consistency of information extraction. Disagreements were discussed between the two reviewers. Mediation from the third author was not required. Results:. A total of 539 articles were identified. 37 articles were included: 13 guidelines and 24 systematic reviews. 70 BPS factors were reported, 15 were excluded, resulting in 55 BPS factors identified. The BPS model is helping clinicians to be more aware of the importance of the patients' context in their pain experience and the risk of them developing chronic pain. Psychosocial factors were identified as better predictors of poor recovery than examination findings. Out of the 55 factors drawn from the literature that are predictors of poor recovery, 13 were biological factors. While it is of upmost importance to assess and manage psychosocial issues, it may be time to include biological factors more explicitly as possible obstacles to recovery