Skip Navigation


Occupational Medicine Advance Access originally published online on June 18, 2008
Occupational Medicine 2008 58(6):439-442; doi:10.1093/occmed/kqn076
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
58/6/439    most recent
kqn076v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Venables, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Allender, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Venables, K. M.
Right arrow Articles by Allender, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Short Reports

Quality of occupational health provision: two rating scales and their determinants

Katherine M. Venables and Steven Allender

Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Background To develop quality scales for occupational health services (OHSs) and describe and explain variation in quality across the UK university sector.

Methods Analysis of data from a national survey, to which 93 of 117 (79%) UK universities responded, and from the Higher Education Statistics Agency. Two quality scales were generated, one from the 1985 International Labour Organization recommendations on OHSs and one from clinicians’ perceptions (good, adequate, poor) about their OHS. The determinants examined were number of university staff, type of OHS (in-house, contracted, none/other), number of full-time equivalent occupational health doctors and nurses and OHS leadership (doctor, nurse, other).

Results There was wide variation in quality and a correlation (r = 0.65) between scales. In-house service, increasing service size and leadership by a doctor or nurse were determinants of higher quality; size of the university was not statistically significant after taking account of these factors.

Conclusions Some university OHSs may not be structured or operated to promote the highest quality of service. Inspection of individual quality scale items may be informative. These scales may be applicable in other employment sectors.

Keywords      Health services research; occupational health services; quality assessment; universities

Correspondence to: Katherine M. Venables, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK. Tel: +44 1865 289227; fax: +44 1865 289260; e-mail: kate.venables{at}dphpc.ox.ac.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.