 |
 |
Dear all This subject has come up frequently over the last few years and features regularly in the archives. This is not to take anything away from those asking the question, it's just that they haven't had a very satisfactory answer yet. Answers have generally fallen into two categories: 1) A reference to an RCN document from the late 1980s/early 90s, which gave some advice on the level of OH resource that various types of industries should have. 2) Advice that all such resource requirements should be based on risk assessment. The latter was, and still is, the right path to follow, however risk assessment needs good information to underpin it, which appears to be disjointed on this issue and subject to a wide variety of opinions. There is a huge amount of skill, experience and knowledge on this list but if we all risk assessed the same reasonably sized business's OH requirements, I bet there would be a huge variation in the result. For example, the difference between one person thinking an audiometric test should take 15 minutes and another thinking it should take 10, 20 or even 30 minutes is a big difference in resource if you are talking about an audiometry programme for all but the smallest of businesses. And we are meant to know what we're talking about! Confusing the issue even more is the nature of modern day OH. The provider/outsourced market place is now bigger than ever before. We have on-site, off-site, telephone case management services, absence management services, visiting consultancy, and a myriad of other models of service provision. Any OH Adviser being asked to assess the needs of their particular business and provide a model of cost effective delivery faces a daunting task. The above text is based on an answer I gave in response to this question in July 2005. The rest of that answer was a proposal to send out a questionnaire asking about type of business, number of employees, number of OHAs and OHPs, types of services, etc with the intention of identifying some norms and averages for various sectors that might inform better risk assessment. I then proposed to post the anonymised results back on the list. In order to start working on it I requested some up front commitment from 20 people but only received about 10 emails so didn't proceed. I am happy to give it another go. As a provider myself, I am fully aware that this could be valuable information. So I am therefore prepared to share it, firstly on the basis of a benchmarking club. If you sign up and complete the questionnaire, you receive the anonymised results. The more who sign up, the more meaningful the results should be. Secondly, for those who are prepared to wait a bit longer, I am willing to present the findings at the next RCN OH Conference. As I am not a natural born researcher, any assistance from someone who is would be appreciated. Regards Lindsey Lindsey Hall Independent Occupational Health Adviser Split Dimension Ltd 07771 596111 Phone/Fax 01454 852715 www.splitdimension.co.uk This electronic transmission is strictly confidential and intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the named addressee or think you may not be the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on the contents of this transmission and should destroy it immediately. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify me as soon as possible. Please note that Split Dimension does not accept any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to protect your computer systems against any possible viruses contained in this transmission and/or attachments. Split Dimension Ltd. Registered in England and Wales. No 5725582. ******************************** Please remove this footer before replying. OCC-HEALTH ARCHIVES: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/occ-health.html CONFERENCES AND STUDY DAYS: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/filearea.cgi?LMGT1=OCC-HEALTH OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH NURSING EDUCATION http://www.aohne.org.uk