Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: The field of occupational health includes a wide variety of interventions ranging from standard clinical interventions to behavioural interventions. An inventory or taxonomy of possible groups of interventions would help in making useful comparisons between similar types or within groups of interventions. It would also help in better pointing out which interventions can not be evaluated by means of a RCT.
Objective: to develop a framework for classification and better understanding of occupational health interventions.
Methods: A non-systematic literature search using Medline and guidelines from the health promotion field. Without any pre-conceived idea of practical use we tried to come up with as many consistent features of occupational health interventions as possible.
Results: Interventions can be classified according to final outcome, mode of action, level of action, complexity of the intervention, target group, place of delivery, time of application and mode of delivery. In these classes interventions can be classified in subclasses. For example for mode of action for interventions to decrease hazardous exposure at work, one can discern technical interventions taking into account the so-called hierarchy of controls, behavioural and organisational interventions. Discerning interventions according to level of action into individual level, group or community level and societal level has important implications for the possibility of randomising participants or clusters. Classifying interventions by mode of delivery into individual personal contact, group personal contact, written personal contact or through the media has important implications for both the number of people that can be reached with the same resources and the effect to be expected.
Conclusions: According to our literature search it seems feasible to draw up a classification of occupational health interventions. It provides a better basis for understanding the possibilities and impact of interventions. The classification can assist reviewers in choosing a point of view for the comparison or synthesis of interventions.
Objective: to develop a framework for classification and better understanding of occupational health interventions.
Methods: A non-systematic literature search using Medline and guidelines from the health promotion field. Without any pre-conceived idea of practical use we tried to come up with as many consistent features of occupational health interventions as possible.
Results: Interventions can be classified according to final outcome, mode of action, level of action, complexity of the intervention, target group, place of delivery, time of application and mode of delivery. In these classes interventions can be classified in subclasses. For example for mode of action for interventions to decrease hazardous exposure at work, one can discern technical interventions taking into account the so-called hierarchy of controls, behavioural and organisational interventions. Discerning interventions according to level of action into individual level, group or community level and societal level has important implications for the possibility of randomising participants or clusters. Classifying interventions by mode of delivery into individual personal contact, group personal contact, written personal contact or through the media has important implications for both the number of people that can be reached with the same resources and the effect to be expected.
Conclusions: According to our literature search it seems feasible to draw up a classification of occupational health interventions. It provides a better basis for understanding the possibilities and impact of interventions. The classification can assist reviewers in choosing a point of view for the comparison or synthesis of interventions.