An efficiency evaluation of different hoisting devices to complete three frequent patient transfers

The aim of this study was to compare the efficiency and staff preferences of three different hoisting devices when completing lying to sitting and sitting to sitting transfers. The study explored time, task steps, physical environments and staff preferences. The study used 15 experienced participants in manual pa-tient handling. Three basic transfers were completed: Bed to chair, Chair to wheelchair and Wheelchair to bed, with two overhead hoists (fixed single track and H-frame) and one floor-based mobile hoist with a manakin load. Data were collected on time taken to complete the tasks and task stag-es. The stages needed to perform the tasks were reported through Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA). Subjective data on ease of use and a comparison of steps/time were collected after each device use. There were no statistical differences in the time taken be-tween the transfer types (P > 0.1). The mobile hoist took significantly longer than the two gantry devices (Post hoc analysis P<0.001). HTA analysis showed added physical and positional tasks were required due the space constraints of the mobile device. Participants reported the H-Frame device to be quicker, required less stages to complete the task and was considered more accurate. Subjectively there was an order of preference of H Frame, Single Track and Mobile de-vice. The time difference between H-Frame gantry hoist and Mobile hoist was calculated at 90 seconds per transfer which cumulatively over a working week can add up to a significant time saving.