The Saxion University of Applied Sciences recently started the project “Safety atWork”. The objective of the project is to increase safety at the workplace by applyingand combining state of the art artifacts Ambient Intelligence, Industrial & ProductDesign and Smart Functional Materials [1].There is a human factor involved as well. Preliminary, safety is related to incidentshappening to persons who get injured or even die. In 97% of the cases where an injuryoccurs [2] that what happens is within someone’s control. Many incidents at work areoften the result of human behavior, how people interact with each other and howpeople cope with risks and guidelines. Industrial environments need to be organizedin such a way that people behave safely in an automatic way and that safety becomesa habit. Forcing safe behavior starts with safe products. However, in many cases thisis not sufficient, and incidents still occur. Therefore communication is often a moreeffective medium. One cost effective, asynchronous, and persisting way ofcommunicating to people is through ICT. The effort of changing behavior throughICT is called Persuasive Technology. In this paper we focus on ambient aspects ofsafety: influencing people in an invisible way to make industrial environments safer.Based on literature we work towards a model to systematically select measures toinfluence behavior to enhance safety. The model is a rudimentary framework still tobe filled out, which is the subject of our current research projects.
MULTIFILE
Background Running-related injuries (RRIs) can be considered the primary enemy of runners. Most literature on injury prediction and prevention overlooks the mental aspects of overtraining and under-recovery, despite their potential role in injury prediction and prevention. Consequently, knowledge on the role of mental aspects in RRIs is lacking. Objective To investigate mental aspects of overtraining and under-recovery by means of an online injury prevention programme. Methods and analysis The ‘Take a Mental Break!’ study is a randomised controlled trial with a 12 month follow-up. After completing a web-based baseline survey, half and full marathon runners were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the control group. Participants of the intervention group obtained access to an online injury prevention programme, consisting of a running-related smartphone application. This app provided the participants of the intervention group with information on how to prevent overtraining and RRIs with special attention to mental aspects. The primary outcome measure is any self-reported RRI over the past 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include vigour, fatigue, sleep and perceived running performance. Regression analysis will be conducted to investigate whether the injury prevention programme has led to a lower prevalence of RRIs, better health and improved perceived running performance. Ethics and dissemination The Medical Ethics Committee of the University Medical Center Utrecht, the Netherlands, has exempted the current study from ethical approval (reference number: NL64342.041.17). Results of the study will be communicated through scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals, scientific reports and presentations on scientific conferences.
Aggressive incidents occur frequently in health care facilities, such as psychiatric care and forensic psychiatric hospitals. Previous research suggests that civil psychiatric inpatients may display more aggression than forensic inpatients. However, there is a lack of research comparing these groups on the incident severity, even though both frequency and severity of aggression influence the impact on staff members. The purpose of this study is to compare the frequency and severity of inpatient aggression caused by forensic and civil psychiatric inpatients in the same Dutch forensic psychiatric hospital. Data on aggressive incidents occurring between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2017, were gathered from hospital files and analyzed using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale, including sexual aggression (MOAS+). Multilevel random intercept models were used to analyze differences between forensic and civil psychiatric patients in severity of aggressive incidents. In all, 3,603 aggressive incidents were recorded, caused by 344 different patients. Civil psychiatric patients caused more aggressive incidents than forensic patients and female patients caused more inpatient aggression compared with male patients. Female forensic patients were found to cause the most severe incidents, followed by female civil psychiatric patients. Male forensic patients caused the least severe incidents. The findings have important clinical implications, such as corroborating the need for an intensive treatment program for aggressive and disruptive civil psychiatric patients, as well as emphasizing the importance of gender-responsive treatment
MULTIFILE
