X hits on this document

567 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

145 / 156

Implementation

Effect estimates: Companies’ scores rank ordered A to Q (best – worst) on basis of self-administered survey at baseline (score out of 100 on first audit; second audit; % change). A: 72; 80; 8%. B: 75; 86; 11%. C: 65, 69, 4%. D:85, 94, 9%. E: 61, 75, 14%. F (data missing – withdrew). G: 60, 69, 9%. H: 44, 58, 14%. I: 71, 86, 15%. J: 41, 52, 11%. K: 36, 49, 13%. L: 31, 34, 3%. M: 69, 73, 4%. N: 43, 58, 15%. O: 42, 45, 3%. P: 44, 55, 11%. Q: 12, 12, 0%. Mean audit scores calculated by reviewers: 1st audit 53.2%; 2nd audit 62.2%; % change 9%. Management system elements rank ordered (% on 1st audit, 2nd audit, % change). Performance indicators (reporting): 87, 91, 4%. Consultation and participation: 79, 88, 9%. Workplace injury management: 64, 84, 20%. Risk management (hazard control): 68, 73, 5%. Management commitment and policy: 61, 73, 12%. OHS Training and Education: 52, 59, 7%. Emergency planning: 47, 58, 11%. Performance indicators (investigation): 47, 53, 6%. Risk management (inspections): 39, 49, 10%. Responsibility and accountability: 35, 47, 12%. Purchasing and contractors: 39, 47, 8%. Performance indicators (statistics): 31, 33, 2%. Audit changes by company size categories (1st audit mean score, 2nd audit mean score, % change): Small (5-19 employees) 35.5, 42.7, 7.2%; Medium (20-99 employees) 45, 66.5, 21.5%; Medium/Large (100+ employees) 55, 79, 24%.

Intermediate OHS

Outcomes Final OHS Outcomes Cost of Intervention Economic Outcomes Facilitators/ Barriers

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

Did the Design Lack Statistical Power? Not applicable.

Were Any Harms of the Intervention Identified? No. IWH Reviewers’ Comments:

Because the sample was non-random, and because there was quite a large refusal rate (40 of the 60 who had been contacted), one cannot generalize from these results to the larger population. The influence of the networking component was not analyzed in this study.

Institute for Work & Health

142

Document info
Document views567
Page views571
Page last viewedTue Jan 17 03:47:00 UTC 2017
Pages156
Paragraphs3709
Words49639

Comments