Journal of Education and Health Promotion

Abstract BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) were known as one of the main occupational
problems among health‑care workers. However, we had some limitations and difficulties for
transferring ergonomic concepts to the health‑care workers, especially nurses due to heavy work
task and insufficient time for that. This study compares the impacts of two ergonomic training
methods (lecture and pamphlet) in nurses of an Iranian tertiary hospital on prevalence of their upper
and lower extremity complaints.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present randomized clinical trial with parallel groups, 1140 nurses
were randomly selected and allocated to the control and two interventional groups. In the interventional
groups, nurses revived a training program and pamphlet as ergonomic training methods about
work‑related MSDs and related ergonomic concept to MSDs prevention and nurses in the control group,
did not receive any ergonomic training methods. Upper and lower extremity complaints measure among
study nurses with Nordic MSDs before 6 months and 1 year after trial intervention. Statistical analysis
including the Kolmogorov–Smirnov goodness‑of‑fit, Chi‑square test, and independent sample t‑test
was performed using SPSS version 22. A two‑tailed P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: At the first and second parts of the study follow‑up, the prevalence of upper and lower
extremities significantly improved in the interventional groups in comparison with the control group.
Moreover, between the two trial groups, the frequency of MSDs in upper and lower extremities
significantly improved among nurses of the pamphlet group in comparison with the lecture group.
CONCLUSION: Findings of the study showed that we can use pamphlet as a suitable tool for
describing ergonomic concepts in comparison with lecture among nurses.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Unwanted sound is recognized as the most extensive source of contaminant
in the workplace. Exposure to intense, continuous, and higher than 85 dB level noise can lead to
noise‑induced hearing loss.The aim of the present study was to determine the level of noise exposure
and its impact on hearing health among auto body workers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This descriptive‑analytic study was conducted in 2020 to investigate
the hearing health status of workers in auto body workshops. Sixty‑one participants were randomly
selected for audiometric testing. The equivalent sound level (Leq) of the workers was measured using
a Casella CEL‑320 noise dosimeter. Audiometric testing was performed using an AC40 audiometer.
The mean hearing threshold levels (HTLs) of both ears were calculated for different frequencies. The
results obtained were analyzed using SPSS v21.0 at a significance level of 95%.
RESULTS: The participants had an average age of 35.5 ± 11.8 years and an average work experience
of 16.5 ± 9.8 years. The mean Leq was 92.3 ± 4.7 dB. The mean HTLs for the right ear and left ear
were 20, 15, 17.6, 19.2 dB, respectively with the right ear suffering more loss. A significant relationship
was found between hearing loss in both ears (P < 0.001). The highest prevalence of hearing loss
in both ears was observed at a frequency of 4 kHz. About 73.8% of the subjects had a normal HTL,
23.3% had mild hearing loss, and 3.3% had severe hearing loss. With increasing work experience,
HTLs also increased significantly, particularly at 2–8 kHz.
CONCLUSIONS: Chronic exposure to noise pollution threatens hearing health. Therefore, it is
necessary to raise the level of awareness among workers in order to enable better hearing health
protection and also to promote the use of hearing protection devices.

Abstract BACKGROUND: The improvement of the knowledge, skill, and attitude of nurses working at the
intensive care unit (ICU) through implementing training need assessment and holding continuous
in‑service training courses are of main requisites for providing better health services to the community.
Based on this, in the present work, we are looking for the identification and prioritization of the training
need of intensive care nurses in the Zabol University of Medical Sciences’ hospitals.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: As a cross‑sectional, descriptive study, including two phases of
identification and prioritization of training needs of ICU nurses, it was conducted by a close‑ended
researcher‑made questionnaire for collecting the data on training needs from the viewpoint nursing
officials, supervisors, and head nurses of the ICU wards in the first phase and a multiple‑choice
scientific test plus a checklist for measuring the knowledge and skill of the nurses in the ICU in the
second phase. In both phases, census method was used for collecting the data. The validity and
reliability of data‑gathering tools, mentioned above, were tested and verified before gathering data.
Data were analyzed with the descriptive statistics.
RESULTS: The results indicated that ventilator setting according to arterial blood gas sampling
and interpretation (77.81), cardiac monitoring, detecting dysrhythmia and taking immediate
intervention (73.04), ventilator setting according to patient’s respiratory status (68.61), airway
management, oxygenation and intubation (64.39), and adults cardiopulmonary resuscitation (61.77)
were the high‑priority training needs of the nurses successively.
CONCLUSION: To improve the quality of training programs and upgrading the knowledge, skill,
and attitude of nurses working at ICU, the significance and the weight of each training titles should
be determined according to the standards and the continuous in‑service training plan along with
nurses’ training needs and duties.