This study suggests that while dentists generally have positive beliefs about reporting occupational exposures, there are gaps in practice.

No abstract

Background With declining specialist occupational physician (OP) numbers, there is increasing recognition of the importance of non-specialist physicians in occupational health (OH) service delivery, yet to date, this physician group remains understudied and their competency requirements poorly understood. Aims To evaluate the quality of a sample of non-specialist OH reports and compare these with specialist reports. Methods A retrospective peer review audit of a convenience sample of 200 consecutive non-specialist and specialist OH reports from an Irish OH service using an assessment form based on the modified Sheffield Assessment Instrument for Letters SAIL(OH)1. Results Of the 200 peer reviewed OH reports, 159 (80%) were from non-specialists. For all questions, 87% and above of non-specialist reports were ‘satisfactory’ or ‘above expected’. On the overall assessment, out of 10, the mean non-specialist report score was 6.8 (standard deviation (SD) 3–10) and the specialist score was 7.3 (SD 3–10). Comparatively, non-specialist reports highlighted legal/ethical issues marginally more and adhered slightly better to contractual/ethical/legal boundaries, while specialist reports fared better in addressing manager’s questions, in their structure and clarity and in covering all significant aspects of the case, particularly if the case was complex. Conclusions Our findings demonstrate a high standard of OH report quality in this sample of non-specialist OPs that is consistent across all key OH report components. Potential development areas are also identified that can inform education/training tailored to this physician group and assist in competency standard-setting.

IntroductionAnnual Influenza vaccination rates among Healthcare Workers (HCW) in Ireland are almost universally low despite national and international recommendations. Improving HCW Influenza vaccination rates remains an annual challenge for Occupational Health Departments. Previously studied intervention strategies that increased vaccine uptake internationally include: provision of free vaccine, easy access to the vaccine, knowledge and behaviour modification through educational activities and/or reminders and/or incentives. The aim of this study was to determine if attitudes towards the Influenza vaccination in HCW in Ireland remained a barrier to uptake of vaccination and if a brief educational intervention could cause an attitudinal shift towards receiving the vaccination. It also questioned the attitudes of HCW towards mandatory Influenza vaccination.MethodsA brief interventional video was commissioned locally prior to the start of the national influenza campaign 2017/18. It contained local healthcare staff discussing evidence based facts regarding the influenza vaccination and rationale for HCW uptake. HCW who attended the intervention were offered a questionnaire at the educational session assessing their attitude towards the vaccination.Result157 HCW attended and 143 completed the questionnaire. In 2016/17 Influenza season 43.4% (n=62) indicated they received the influenza vaccination. Following the intervention, the intention to receive the vaccination in 2017/18 increased to 76.2% (n=109). A further 15.3%(n=22) indicated vaccination consideration. 50.3% (n=72) stated the brief intervention had influenced their decision. Prior to the educational intervention 39.2% (n=56) agreed with mandatory Influenza vaccination for HCW. This increased to 49.7% (n=71) post intervention.DiscussionThe brief educational intervention increased the numbers of HCW indicating they would get or would consider getting the annual Influenza vaccination. The intervention was noted as an influencing factor and could be a useful tool in increasing the vaccination rate amongst HCW in Ireland particularly if engagement with it was a mandatory requirement.