Hi 

In the feedback in my last position we got from management about the reports the bits they tended to like was 

-Headings- to help them zone in on aspects of report e..g Current Fitness for Work, Future Fitness for work, Current Health Issues Affecting Work etc

- Use of timelines .e.g. fit for x for 4 weeks, unfit for y for 8 weeks, fully fit by 12 weeks 

- if cannot provide an opinion why not e.g. I cannot comment on FFW beyond 8 weeks as the outcome of medical investigations are required and these are unlikely to be available for 8 weeks. The same if a review was required --- why? This helped justify their costs etc.

- The clear use of the phrase 'In my opinion"

What they disliked:

- reports that were word heavy (long sentences etc)

- reports that did not give them information for more than the next 4 weeks 

- reports that seemed to validate their employee's point of view 

- reports that gave too much of the employee's point of view.. .they are looking for our opinion not a rehash of the employee's story 

- reports that seemed to have no insight into the culture/nature of the business e.g. fit for all work but unfit for climbing steps if most jobs involved a lot of this

- reports that did not ackowledge that adjustments were advisory not a mandatory OH prescription (often an issue in union heavy organisations where the union would say "OH have said you must do......"

- Reports where we didn't give them what they wanted to hear  .. but hey .. nature of the job :)

Regards

Carr

******************************** 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