PENGARUH PENGGUNAAN KURSI PERSALINAN BC-MK15 TERHADAP KETIDAKNYAMANAN BIDAN DALAM PERTOLONGAN PERSALINAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36743/medikes.v7i1.200Keywords:
BC-MK15 Birth Chair, Discomfort, MidwifeAbstract
Midwife has risks in their work, such as at first stage delivery care, they have risk of unnatural work posture, while in the second and third stage midwife experiences a body irregularity which can be seen in the spinal segment and postural instability. Unusual work postures continuously can cause musculoskeletal disorders (MSD). The etiology of musculoskeletal disorders is very complicated and controversial, so the lack of information can lead to more difficult risk management, but by detecting discomfort is very useful as an indicator of the risk of musculoskeletal disorders, thus minimizing the discomfort may contribute to reducing risk of musculoskeletal disorders, since both are known associated with exposure to the musculoskeletal system by biomechanical loads. The importance of the ergonomics aspect for the midwife to reduce the discomfort of the body in doing it’s work, is strongly supported by the appropriate facilities such as the BC-MK15 birth chair.
This research is quasi experimental with simple random sampling, subject is divided into two groups, intervention and control (22 midwives each group) who work at Puskesmas Garuda, Puter and Ibrahim Adji Bandung. Discomfort scoring using Body Part Discomfort Scale (BPDS). Statistical test using Kolmogorov -Smirnov analysis to see the difference of discomfort between treatment and control group for each stage of delivery care, and Chi-Square test to see the effect between the two study groups also Mann-Whitney test to see the discomfort diffrences between each group for the whole stage of delivery care (stage I-III). The significance level been decided for p <0.05 . The results showed that there was an effect of the use of the BC-MK15 birth chair to the midwife discomfort level for each body part in every stage during delivery care, and there was a lower median rate of discomfort in the intervention group compare to the control group The conclusion was the use of BC-MK15 birth chairs can decrease midwife discomfort for every stage during delivery care in the intervention group compare to the control group.
References
2. Hignett S. identification of risk factors. Br J Midwifery. 1996;4(11):590–6.
3. Stichler JF, Feiler JL, Chase K. Understanding Risks of Workplace Injury in Labor and Delivery. JOGNN. 2011;41:71–81.
4. Nowotny-Czupryna O, Naworska B, Brzęk A, Nowotny J, Famuła A, Kmita B, et al. Professional experience and ergonomic aspects of midwives’ work. Int J Occup Med Environ Health [Internet]. 2012;25(3):265–74. Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22791592%5Cnhttp://ijomeh.eu/Professional-experience-and-ergonomic-aspects-of-midwives-work,2255,0,2.html
5. Barbe MF, Barr AE. Inflammation and the pathophysiology of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Brain Behav Immun. 2006;20:423–9.
6. Long MH, Bogossian FE, Johnston V. Functional consequences of work-related spinal musculoskeletal symptoms in a cohort of Australian midwives. Women and Birth [Internet]. 2013;26(1):e50–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2012.09.005
7. Wicaksono B. Faktor yang berhubungan dengan nyeri punggung bawah pada bidan saat menolong proses persalinan. Universitas Airlangga; 2012.
8. Komala R, Modjo R. Faktor-Faktor Yang Berhubungan Terhadap Keluhan Musculoskeletal Disorders ( MSDs ) Pada Bidan Di Pusat Kesehatan Masyarakat Dengan Tempat Bersalin ( Puskesmas DTP ) Kota Bandung Tahun 2013. 2013.
9. rekap studi pendahuluan(1).
10. Straker LM. Body Discomfort: Assessment tools. In: Occupational Ergonomics: Engineering and Administrative Controls. 2005. p. 26–40.
11. Staton N, Hedge A, Brookhuis K, Salas E, Hendrick H, Stolwijk JAJ. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods. In: handbook of human factors and ergonomics methods. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2005. p. 76–86.
12. Kee D, Lee I. Relationships between subjective and objective measures in assessing postural stresses. Appl Ergon [Internet]. 2012;43(2):277–82. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.06.002
13. Tarwaka. Ergonomi untuk keselamatan, kesehatan kerja dan produktifitas. 1st ed. surakarta: UNIBA Press; 2004.
14. NHS Lothian Midwifery Guidance. nhsggc-midwifery-mh-guidance. 2011. p. 1–7.
15. Wajdi F, Cahyadi D. ANALISIS KELUHAN FISIK BIDAN AKIBAT MENOLONG PARTUS. In: Seminar Nasional Sains dan Teknologi Fakultas Teknik Universitas Muhammadiyah Jakarta. Jakarta; 2016. p. 1–7.
16. Yap B. Ergonomic design of a physiologic birth support system. Massey University New Zealand; 1996.
17. Reenen HHH. Does musculoskeletal discomfort at work predict future musculoskeletal. Ergon J. 2008;51(December 2014):37–41.
18. Kilpatrick S, Garrison E. Chapter 13: Normal Labor and Delivery. In: Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies [Internet]. Sixth Edit. Elsevier Inc.; 2012. p. 267–86. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-4377-1935-2.00013-2
19. Liao JB, Buhimschi CS, Norwitz ER. Normal labor: Mechanism and duration. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2005;32(2):145–64.
20. Cunningham.F.G, Leveno.K.J, Bloom.F.L, Spong.C.Y, Dashe.J.S HB. section 7. In: Williams obstetrics. 24th ed. New York: McGraw Hill Education; 2007. p. 408–33.
21. JNPK-KR. Penuntun Belajar Keterampilan Asuhan Persalinan Normal. Jakarta; 2012. p. 1–6.
22. McKeown C. A Guide to Human Factors and Ergonomics [Internet]. Vol. 51, Ergonomics. 2008. 949-951 p. Available from: 10.1080/00140130701680379%5Cnhttp://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=pbh&AN=32069435&lang=fr&site=ehost-live
23. Widinugroho BP, Teknik F, Studi P, Industri T. Universitas indonesia evaluasi postur kerja mahasiswa/i tingkat profesi fkg-ui pada tindakan pembersihan karang gigi dengan posisi duduk dalam. Universitas Indonesia; 2011.
24. Rusdiana D. Gambaran kenyamanan posisi duduk ibu menyusui dikelurahan pisangan tahun 2013. Universitas Islam Negeri Syarif Gidayatullah; 2013.
25. Man HU, Zhang L, Interior D, Systems L, Helander MG. Identifying Factors of Comfort and Discomfort in Sitting. 1996;38(3):377–89.
26. OSHA. Ergonomics : The Study of Work. Vol. 2000. 2000.
27. Barr AE, Barbe MF, Billing S, Clark BD, Changes S, Email F. Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders : Rev Lit Arts Am. 2004;3970.
28. Long MH, Johnston V, Bogossian F. Work-related upper quadrant musculoskeletal disorders in midwives , nurses and physicians : A systematic review of risk factors and functional consequences. Appl Ergon [Internet]. 2012;43(3):455–67. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2011.07.002
29. Drury CG, Francher M. Evaluation of a forward-sloping. 1985;(March):41–7.
30. Pheasant S. Bodyspace. second edi. Philadelphia: Taylor Francis; 2003.
31. Alnaser MZ, Wughalter EH. Effect of chair design on ratings of discomfort. 2009;34:223–34.
32. Gupta J, Hofmeyr G, Shehmar M. Position in the second stage of labour for women without epidural anaesthesia ( Review ). Cochrane. 2012;(5):1–92.
33. Chuan TK, Hartono M, Kumar N. Anthropometry of the Singaporean and Indonesian populations. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]. 2010;40(6):757–66. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2010.05.001
34. Habanananda T. Non-Pharmacological Pain Relief in Labour. 2004;87:194–202.
35. Ebe K, Griffin MJ. Factors affecting static seat cushion comfort. Ergonomics. 2001;44(10):901–21.
36. Kaur N, Miller L, Njndam D, Rubis N, Sennett F. Engineering Design Report Reconfigurable Obstetrics Delivery Bed. Michigan; 2009.
37. Documents USP, Company H. United States Patent [ 191 Patent Number : Date of Patent ; References Cited US . Patent. United States; 1991.
38. Sunandi I, Ginting M, Marpaung.B. Perancangan Ergonomis Tempat Tidur Rumah Sakit. J Ilm Tek Ind. 2013;1(2):95–102.
39. Steering Committee for the Workshop on Work-Related Musculoskeletal Injuries: The Research Base. Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: Report, Workshop Summary, and Workshop Papers. In 1999. p. 240.
40. Hedge A, Ray EJ. Effects of an Electronic Height-Adjustable Worksurface on Computer Worker Musculoskeletal Discomfort and Productivity. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet [Internet]. 2004;48(8):1091–5. Available from: http://www.ergo.human.cornell.edu/Pub/HFlabReports/EHARep0904.pdf%5Cnhttp://pro.sagepub.com/lookup/doi/10.1177/154193120404800803
41. Dahlan M. Besar sampel dalam penelitian kedokteran dan kesehatan. edisi 4. Jakarta: epidemiologi indonesia; 2016. 179-181 p.
42. Sastroasmoro.S. Dasar dasar metodologi penelitian klinisPemilihan subyek penelitian. In: Dasar dasar metodologi penelitian klinis. edisi keem. Jakarta: Sagung seto; 2012. p. 89–101.
43. Cameron JA. Assessing work-related body-part discomfort : Current strategies and a behaviorally oriented assessment tool 1. Int J Ind Ergon. 1996;8141(95).
44. Marley RJ, Kumar N. An improved musculoskeletal discomfort assessment tool. Int J Ind Ergon. 1996;17(1):21–7.
45. Messing K, Vézina N, Major M-È, Ouellet S, Tissot F, Couture V, et al. Body maps : an indicator of physical pain for worker-oriented ergonomic interventions. Policy Pract Heal Saf. 2008;6(2):31–49.
46. Dahlan M. Statistik untuk kedokteran dan kesehatan. edisi 6. epidemiologi indonesia; 2016.
47. Webb P. Why? Linking exposure and disease. In: Essential Epidemiology. fifth ed. Cambridge: Cambridge university press; 2007. p. 89–105.
48. Gradjean K and. Fitting the task to the human: A textbook of Occupational ergonomics. London and NewYork: Taylor & Francis; 2005.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
