Author | OH intervention evaluated | Measurement instrument | Setting | Study participants | Results |
Patient surveys: | |||||
Conbere et al, 199230 | Case management programme | Mailed questionnaire on 16 aspects of case management; 5 point Likert scale | OHS, USA | n=61 Participants in case management programme past 4 years | 55% Very satisfied or satisfied, average score 3.37 |
Rogerset al, 199331 | OH programme on care and prevention, mainly periodic health examinations | Mailed questionnaire on aspects of consultation process and administrative aspects; 5 point Likert scale | OHS related to one pharmaceutical company, USA | n=494 Employees visiting OHS one week before questionnaire in three months period | 62–77% Very satisfied with doctor 64–80% Very satisfied with nurse, average score 4.5–4.8 |
Bosmaet al, 199632 | Rehabilitation of sick workers | Questionnaire with 16 items on satisfaction; 5 point Likert scale | 20 Occupational physicians from different OHSs, the Netherlands | n=166 Patients directly after visit | 97% Very satisfied or satisfied, average satisfaction score 4.3 |
Kujala and Vaisänen, 199733 | OHS in general | Mailed questionnaire with 4 point Likert scale | Wood processing company, Finland | n=546 Employees (377 made use of OHS in past 6 months) | 76% High degree of satisfaction in general 84% High degree of satisfaction after visit in past 6 months |
Antti-Poikaet al, 199834 | OHS in general | Mailed questionnaire with 7 point scale ranging from 4 to 10 | Two companies in Finland | n=1266 Employees | Average satisfaction score 8.7 |
Mitchellet al, 199935 | OH programme | Questionnaire on service quality with 25 items; 5 point Likert scale | Government office, USA | n=200 Randomly chosen employees | Average satisfaction score 3.8–4.1 |
Plomp, 199936 | Rehabilitation, consultation, health examination | Interviews: were you satisfied? 3 point scale: positive, moderate, negative | OHS of three companies, the Netherlands | n=286 Employees that visited OHS in past year | 38%–76% Satisfied |
Van der Weide et al, 199937 | Occupational rehabilitation for low back pain | Questionnaire on several dimensions of satisfaction; 24 items; 5 point Likert scale | Eight OHS participating in randomised controlled trials | n=59 Patients rehabilitated according to guidelines by occupational physicians | Mean (SD) score 66(16) % of maximum attainable score; score 11 points higher if guidelines were followed better |
Client surveys: | |||||
Wood et al, 198738 | OHS in general | Questionnaire yes or no satisfied, average percentage satisfied | OHS related to 32 firms, Australia | n=143 Managers (n=32), employees (n=76), OH professionals (n=35) | Employees less satisfied than managers |
Kahan et al, 199539 | Occupational hygiene services | Postal questionnaire; 5 point Likert scale | Occupational Hygiene Service, Israel | n=144 Clients during a 2 year period | 76.1% Mostly or completely satisfied with services in general |
Weel et al, 199640 | New form of service delivery of OHS | Interview | OHS related to seven firms in the Netherlands | n=7 Company officials | Opinion on quality of OHS was more positive after than before experiment |
Dyck, 199641 | OHS, managed rehabilitation care (MRC) and employee assistance programme (EAP) | Questionnaire about service quality; gaps between expectations and providers perceptions | OHS gas and oil company, Canada | n=57 OHS, n=48 MRC, n=17 EAP, Employees, managers and caregivers | No gaps between clients' expectations and providers' perceptions; quality high |
Hooiveldet al, 199917 | OHS in general | Postal questionnaire; 5 point Likert scale; 10 point general satisfaction rating. | All OHSs in the Netherlands | n=481 Workers' councils | 50% Satisfied or very satisfied with OHS; average satisfaction rating 5.3 to 6.8 (out of 10) |