PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Drushca Lalloo
AU  - Evangelia Demou
AU  - Marisa  Stevenson
AU  - Mairi  Gaffney
AU  - Ewan Beaton Macdonald
TI  - Comparison of competency priorities between UK occupational physicians and occupational health nurses
AID  - 10.1136/oemed-2016-104049
DP  - 2017 May 01
TA  - Occupational and Environmental Medicine
PG  - 384--386
VI  - 74
IP  - 5
4099  - http://oem.bmj.com/content/74/5/384.short
4100  - http://oem.bmj.com/content/74/5/384.full
SO  - Occup Environ Med2017 May 01; 74
AB  - Objectives The competencies required of occupational physicians (OPs) and occupational health nurses (OHNs) separately have been studied in various countries but little research has made direct comparisons between these two key occupational health (OH) professional groups. The aim of this study was to compare current competency priorities between UK OPs and OHNs.Methods A modified Delphi study conducted among professional organisations and networks of UK OPs and OHNs. This formed part of a larger Delphi, including international OPs. It was undertaken in two rounds (round 1—‘rating’, round 2—‘ranking’), using a questionnaire based on available OH competency guidance, the literature, expert panel reviews and conference discussions.Results In each round (rating/ranking), 57/49 and 48/54 responses were received for OPs and OHNs respectively. The principle domain (PD) competency ranks were very highly correlated (Spearman’s r=0.972) with the same PDs featuring in the top four and bottom three positions. OPs and OHNs ranked identically for the top two PDs (good clinical care and general principles of assessment and management of occupational hazards to health). Research methods was ranked lowest by both groups.Conclusions This study has observed a high level of agreement among UK OPs and OHNs on current competency priorities. The ‘clinically focused’ competency priorities likely reflect that although OH practice will broaden in response to various factors, traditional ‘core’ OH activities will still be required. These mutually identified priorities can serve to strengthen collaboration between these groups, develop joint education/training programmes and identify common professional development opportunities.