Ramazzini; Blog on work and health by Annet Lenderink

Icon

Intervention to improve reporting occupational diseases in the Netherlands

precontemplator

Actionercontemplator

After 2 years of research an writing and the interesting process of submitting and revising my first scientific article, I am proud to announce that it is online now. You can read the full article, because it is open access. The subject is the reporting of occupational diseases by Dutch OPs and the effect of a relatively small intervention trying to improve that. 

Annet F. Lenderink · Dick Spreeuwers · Jac J. L. van der Klink · Frank J. H. van Dijk Int Arch Occup Environ Health DOI 10.1007/s00420-009-0468-8

Abstract
Purpose
: To assess the effectiveness of supplying occupational physicians (OPs) with targeted and stage-matched information or with feedback on reporting occupational diseases to the national registry in the Netherlands.

Methods: In a randomized controlled design, 1076 OPs were divided into three groups based on previous reporting behaviour: precontemplators not considering reporting, contemplators considering reporting and actioners reporting occupational diseases. Precontemplators and contemplators were randomly assigned to receive stage-matched, stage-mismatched or general information. Actioners were randomly assigned to receive personalized or standardized feedback upon notification. Outcome measures were the number of OPs reporting and the number of reported occupational diseases in a 180-day period before and after the intervention.

Results: Precontemplators were significantly more male and self-employed compared to contemplators and actioners. There was no significant effect of stage-matched information versus stage-mismatched or general information on the percentage of reporting OPs and on the mean number of notifications in each group. Receiving any information affected reporting more in contemplators than in precontemplators. The mean number of notifications in actioners increased more after personalized feedback than after standardized feedback, but the difference was not significant.

Conclusions: This study supports the concept that contemplators are more susceptible to receiving information but could not confirm an effect of stage-matching this information on reporting occupational diseases to the national registry.

Filed under: Occupational diseases, Occupational medicine, Reporting OD's

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: