# Differences in Nurses' Upper-Body Posture in Manual Patient Handling--A Qualitative Case Study
## 3 Results
### Perceived Exertion  
Table 7 shows the results of the left-sided positioning for the perceived exertion, separated for both nurses. Overall, nurse 2 showed lower mean values in perceived exertion. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences between both nurses for left-sided overall perceived exertion (\(p\) = 0.033) with lower mean values of 1.25 (95% CI: 0-2) for nurse 2, perceived exertion of the shoulders (\(p\) = 0.006) with lower mean values of 1.53 (95% CI: 1-2) for nurse 2, perceived exertion of the arms (\(p\) = 0.014) with lower mean values of 1.33 (95% CI: 0-2) for nurse 2, as well as perceived exertion of the legs (\(p\) < 0.001) with lower mean values of 4.00 (95% CI: 3-5) for nurse 2. For right-sided positioning, both nurses showed comparable values, except for perceived exertion of the legs. Nurse 2 showed significantly lower mean values of 3.62 (\(p\) < 0.001, 95% CI: 2-5).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline
**Borg Score** & **Nurse 1** & **Nurse 2** & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{_ME_} & \\ \hline  & & & \(\mathbf{U}\) & \(\mathbf{p}\) & \(\mathbf{MD}\) & \(\mathbf{SE}\) & \(\mathbf{95\% CI}\) \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{_Left-sided (N = 12)_} \\ \hline
**overall** & \(10\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(9\pm 1\) (7–10) & \(\mathbf{35.00}\) & \(\mathbf{0.033}\) & \(\mathbf{1.25}\) & \(\mathbf{0.50}\) & \(\mathbf{0-2}\) \\
**neck** & \(8\pm 1\) (7–10) & \(8\pm 1\) (7–9) & \(66.00\) & \(0.755\) & \(0.22\) & \(0.35\) & \(-1-1\) \\
**shoulder** & \(9\pm 1\) (7–11) & \(8\pm 1\) (6–9) & \(\mathbf{25.00}\) & \(\mathbf{0.006}\) & \(\mathbf{1.53}\) & \(\mathbf{0.45}\) & \(\mathbf{1-2}\) \\
**arms** & \(11\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(9\pm 1\) (7–11) & \(\mathbf{30.50}\) & \(\mathbf{0.014}\) & \(\mathbf{1.33}\) & \(\mathbf{0.52}\) & \(\mathbf{0-2}\) \\
**upper back** & \(9\pm 1\) (7–11) & \(9\pm 1\) (7–11) & \(63.00\) & \(0.630\) & \(0.28\) & \(0.52\) & \(-1-1\) \\
**lower back** & \(11\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(10\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(68.00\) & \(0.843\) & \(0.14\) & \(0.54\) & \(-1-1\) \\
**legs** & \(10\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(6\pm 0\) (6–6) & \(\mathbf{0.00}\) & \(\mathbf{<0.001}\) & \(\mathbf{4.00}\) & \(\mathbf{0.37}\) & \(\mathbf{3-5}\) \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{_Right-sided (N = 7)_} \\ \hline
**overall** & \(9\pm 1\) (7–11) & \(9\pm 2\) (7–10) & \(21.50\) & \(0.710\) & \(0.29\) & \(0.64\) & \(-1-2\) \\
**neck** & \(8\pm 1\) (6–9) & \(8\pm 0\) (7–9) & \(23.50\) & \(0.902\) & \(-0.19\) & \(0.44\) & \(-1-1\) \\
**shoulder** & \(9\pm 1\) (7–10) & \(8\pm 1\) (7–10) & \(15.50\) & \(0.259\) & \(0.62\) & \(0.57\) & \(-1-2\) \\
**arms** & \(10\pm 2\) (7–12) & \(10\pm 1\) (8–11) & \(18.00\) & \(0.456\) & \(0.48\) & \(0.69\) & \(-1-2\) \\
**upper back** & \(9\pm 2\) (6–11) & \(9\pm 1\) (8–11) & \(21.50\) & \(0.710\) & \(-0.43\) & \(0.67\) & \(-2-1\) \\
**lower back** & \(10\pm 1\) (8–12) & \(10\pm 1\) (10–11) & \(22.00\) & \(0.805\) & \(-0.29\) & \(0.57\) & \(-2-1\) \\
**legs** & \(10\pm 2\) (7–11) & \(6\pm 0\) (6–6) & \(\mathbf{0.00}\) & \(\mathbf{0.001}\) & \(\mathbf{3.62}\) & \(\mathbf{0.55}\) & \(\mathbf{2-5}\) \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
* MD = mean difference; SE = standard error; 95% CI = 95% confidence interval. \(\dagger\) = Values are mean \(\pm\) SD (range). Results in bold type indicate significance at the \(\alpha\leq 0.05\) level.  
\end{table}
Table 7: Comparison of perceived exertion in left- and right-sided positioning between nurses; Mann–Whitney U test, main effects (ME) *\(\dagger\).  
Figure 5: Acceleration of the hand on the shoulder in sequence 1.