1,654 research outputs found

    Editor\u27s Notes

    Get PDF

    Sustaining Management Commitment to Workplace Health Programs:. The Case of Participatory Ergonomics

    Get PDF
    This article investigates management commitment to workplace health and safety through an analysis of the implementation of participatory ergonomic (PE) interventions in three worksites. The PE programs were established to address the burden of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Drawing upon interview and observational data, the analysis examines the evolution of managerial support for PE programs over time and in the context of pressures internal and external to the worksites. Ergonomic Change Teams in all three sites experienced problems establishing authority to act as change agents and in accessing employee time to carry out their activities. Resolution of these problems was heavily contingent on the commitment of senior management, and the efforts of individual management personnel to intervene in support of the PE program. Our findings highlight that “management” is not a monolithic entity and managerial structures are often marked by divisions in priorities, including health and safety.Les travaux sur la santĂ© et la sĂ©curitĂ© dans les Ă©tablissements mettent l’accent sur l’importance de l’implication de la direction. Une approche en matiĂšre de santĂ© et de sĂ©curitĂ© au travail qui devient de plus en plus acceptĂ©e est l’ergonomie participative (EP), qui cherche Ă  rĂ©duire l’exposition des travailleurs Ă  des troubles musculosquelettiques. Les dĂ©bats en ergonomie participative font de façon constante ressortir l’importance d’un engagement de la part de la direction (Haims et Carayon, 1998).Des travaux ont rassemblĂ© les Ă©lĂ©ments d’un cas convaincant au sujet de l’appui de la direction pour rĂ©ussir des interventions en santĂ© et sĂ©curitĂ© au travail, mais on connaĂźt peu d’analyses du processus qui conduit Ă  l’engagement de la direction et Ă  son maintien. Le fait de se demander ce qu’est la nature des relations entre des influences d’ordre structurel, tels que les impĂ©ratifs de la production, et les activitĂ©s de la direction peuvent amĂ©liorer notre comprĂ©hension du support de la direction.Cet essai analyse l’engagement de la direction en matiĂšre de santĂ© et de sĂ©curitĂ© au travail par le biais d’une Ă©valuation de la mise en oeuvre d’un programme d’ergonomie participative dans trois Ă©tablissements : un constructeur automobile, un fabricant de meubles et un service de messagerie. Les interventions dĂ©butĂšrent avec la formation d’une Ă©quipe de facilitateurs en ergonomie participative dans chaque Ă©tablissement, qui regroupait des travailleurs horaires, des reprĂ©sentants de la direction et un facilitateur en ergonomie, ce dernier Ă©tant un membre de l’équipe de recherche universitaire. L’analyse se centre sur l’évolution de l’appui de la direction au programme d’ergonomie participative sur une pĂ©riode de temps, comme il se dĂ©ploie dans un contexte de pressions Ă  l’emplacement du travail, tant Ă  l’interne qu’à l’externe, surtout celles liĂ©es Ă  la production.Les interventions sont Ă©valuĂ©es Ă  l’aide d’une approche cas multiple et les donnĂ©es des Ă©tudes de cas sont tirĂ©es des entrevues effectuĂ©es sur le terrain et des notes prises. Dans chaque emplacement, les notes venant du terrain furent enregistrĂ©es sur les lieux du travail et au cours des rencontres de l’équipe. Les notes prises sur le terrain fournissaient un compte-rendu des activitĂ©s sur le site et les reconstructions d’échanges informels entre les chercheurs sur le terrain et diffĂ©rents membres du personnel, incluant des travailleurs horaires, des cadres intermĂ©diaires et supĂ©rieurs. Dans chaque emplacement, des entrevues ont Ă©tĂ© conduites avec environ une vingtaine de personnes, incluant des membres de l’équipe d’intervention, Ă©galement de la direction supĂ©rieure locale et des travailleurs diffĂ©rents de ceux membres de l’équipe d’intervention.Les notes prises sur le terrain et les entrevues transcrites furent traitĂ©es Ă  l’aide d’un logiciel d’analyse de type qualitatif. Pour chaque ensemble de donnĂ©es, un schĂ©ma de codification prĂ©liminaire a Ă©tĂ© mis au point et par la suite rĂ©visĂ© en ne retenant que les lectures multiples du matĂ©riel recueilli. Les sections basĂ©es sur les codes ont Ă©tĂ© retirĂ©es et ensuite Ă©valuĂ©es pour procĂ©der Ă  l’analyse.L’analyse est ancrĂ©e dans une perspective de processus politique en matiĂšre de changement technologique et organisationnel (McLoughlin et Badham, 2005; Thomas, 1994). Cette approche fournit une façon d’envisager l’évolution dans le temps des programmes organisationnels, une maniĂšre qui se prĂ©occupe des dimensions structurelles et interactionnelles de la vie en sociĂ©tĂ©. Dans l’analyse qui suit de l’évolution des programmes d’ergonomie participative, cette perspective est retenue en vue d’évaluer comment ces programmes se dĂ©roulent dans un contexte marquĂ© au coin des activitĂ©s et des intĂ©rĂȘts divergents des acteurs, qui commandent des degrĂ©s divers d’autoritĂ©, dans un milieu caractĂ©risĂ© par des forces internes telles que des pressions venant de la production et par des forces externes.Cette vision considĂšre les formations sociales comme des programmes organisationnels tels qu’ils sont façonnĂ©s par les actions de ceux de l’intĂ©rieur aussi bien par l’effet des contextes organisationnels et sociaux plus larges. La perspective d’un processus politique conçoit Ă©galement l’évolution des programmes organisationnels comme un ensemble de dĂ©cisions prises par des groupes divers dans le temps, et non simplement comme une dĂ©cision de retenir un programme en particulier. De plus, divers groupes au sein d’une organisation ont des intĂ©rĂȘts divergents et une autoritĂ© pour actualiser ces intĂ©rĂȘts, qui en retour exercent une influence sur la mise en oeuvre. L’approche du processus politique met Ă©galement l’accent sur l’importance des conditions internes et externes aux lieux de travail, ce qui complique et parfois mĂȘme empĂȘche l’exercice chez les individus de leurs aptitudes Ă  donner une direction au dĂ©veloppement de programmes organisationnels.Nos conclusions indiquent que les Ă©quipes d’ergonomie dans les trois Ă©tablissements ont rencontrĂ© des problĂšmes d’attribution de l’autoritĂ© de procĂ©der Ă  titre d’agents de changement au sein du lieu de travail et des problĂšmes d’évaluation du temps des salariĂ©s Ă  rĂ©aliser leurs agendas. Ces problĂšmes Ă©taient intimement reliĂ©s : l’absence d’autoritĂ© entraĂźnait une inaptitude Ă  obtenir l’engagement du temps des salariĂ©s, dans certains cas le temps d’assister aux rencontres des Ă©quipes de changement et, dans d’autres, d’effectuer des changements de nature ergonomique. Dans tous ces exemples de problĂšmes rencontrĂ©s eu Ă©gard au temps, la direction ne rĂ©ussissait pas Ă  fournir le personnel que les Ă©quipes de changement nĂ©cessitaient. Pendant qu’un Ă©vĂšnement de nature locale affectait la façon dont le programme de caractĂšre ergonomique se dĂ©roulait dans chaque lieu de travail, des difficultĂ©s d’obtenir l’autoritĂ© et le temps de faire des changements ont entravĂ© le succĂšs des interventions dans les trois emplacements.Nos conclusions mettent en Ă©vidence le fait que la direction des Ă©tablissements ne forme pas un bloc monolithique et que les structures de direction sont souvent marquĂ©es par des divisions au plan des prioritĂ©s et des intĂ©rĂȘts. Dans tous les emplacements, la direction supĂ©rieure appuyait le lancement des interventions, mais c’était les cadres et les superviseurs qui gĂ©nĂ©ralement s’intĂ©ressaient aux enjeux pratiques inhĂ©rents au maintien de la bonne marche de la production une fois l’intervention en cheminement. Étant donnĂ© le caractĂšre des pressions qu’ils devaient supporter, le fait d’obtenir leur appui prĂ©sentait un dĂ©fi continu. De plus, au passage d’un emplacement Ă  l’autre, la direction supĂ©rieure diffĂ©rait quant au maintien de son engagement initial au cours du dĂ©roulement des programmes en ergonomie et plus particuliĂšrement, lorsqu’un programme rencontrait une certaine rĂ©sistance, elle apportait son renfort par une intervention efficace.Le problĂšme principal que rencontraient les interventions rĂ©sidait dans le fait que les programmes de santĂ© et de sĂ©curitĂ© au travail se voyaient accorder une importance secondaire en Ă©tant subordonnĂ©s aux objectifs de la production. Un enjeu important ici Ă©tait la position retranchĂ©e de la direction eu Ă©gard Ă  la prĂ©vention des accidents d’ordre musculosquelettique. D’une maniĂšre plus particuliĂšre, des conflits se prĂ©sentaient quant aux ressources affectĂ©es Ă  la santĂ© et Ă  la sĂ©curitĂ©, sur l’organisation et le rythme du travail, tenant compte de la prioritĂ© accordĂ©e au maintien ou Ă  l’accroissement de la productivitĂ© aux dĂ©pends d’un investissement dans les enjeux de sĂ©curitĂ© de nature ergonomique.En poursuivant un cadre de rĂ©fĂ©rence de l’ordre d’un processus politique, cet essai Ă©value la maniĂšre dont un programme organisationnel dans son Ă©volution s’éloigne de sa conception initiale et, Ă  l’intĂ©rieur de ce processus, la maniĂšre dont les positions de la direction en matiĂšre de santĂ© et de sĂ©curitĂ© deviennent volatiles et sensibles aux pressions, tant Ă  l’interne qu’à l’externe, dans un emplacement donnĂ©. Nos conclusions mettent en Ă©vidence l’obligation pour la direction, au moment de la conceptualisation d’un programme, de tenir compte de l’hĂ©tĂ©rogĂ©nĂ©itĂ© propre Ă  un niveau (direction supĂ©rieure et cadre moyen), de l’objet de la responsabilitĂ© (que ce soit la production, la santĂ© ou la sĂ©curitĂ© au travail) au sein mĂȘme d’une entreprise. De plus, des diffĂ©rences au sein des organisations quant Ă  l’accĂšs aux ressources et aux avantages acquis de la direction et des travailleurs ont un impact sur le dĂ©roulement d’un programme. Une implication importante qui en dĂ©coule est Ă  l’effet que des ententes d’appui Ă  une intervention au moment de son lancement ne peuvent ĂȘtre envisagĂ©es comme stables dans le temps.Este artĂ­culo investiga el compromiso de la gerencia respecto a la salud y seguridad ocupacional mediante un anĂĄlisis de la implementaciĂłn de las intervenciones de ergonomĂ­a participativa (EP) en tres centros de trabajo. Basado en entrevistas y datos de observaciĂłn, el anĂĄlisis investiga la evoluciĂłn del apoyo de la gerencia a los programas EP a travĂ©s del tiempo y en el contexto de presiones internas y externas al centro de trabajo. Los equipos de cambio ergonĂłmico en los tres lugares experimentaron problemas en cuanto a establecer la autoridad para actuar como agentes del cambio y en cuanto a la liberaciĂłn de tiempo de los empleados para llevar a cabo sus actividades. La resoluciĂłn de estos problemas dependiĂł en gran medida del compromiso de la alta gerencia y de los esfuerzos individuales del personal de gerencia para intervenir en ayuda a los programas EP. Nuestros resultados hacen resaltar que la gerencia no es una entidad monolĂ­tica y que las estructuras de gestiĂłn son frecuentemente marcadas por divisiones respecto a las prioridades, incluyendo la salud y la seguridad

    Tackling the tensions in evaluating capacity strengthening for health research in low- and middle-income countries

    Get PDF
    Strengthening research capacity in low- and middle-income countries is one of the most effective ways of advancing their health and development but the complexity and heterogeneity of health research capacity strengthening (RCS) initiatives means it is difficult to evaluate their effectiveness. Our study aimed to enhance understanding about these difficulties and to make recommendations about how to make health RCS evaluations more effective. Through discussions and surveys of health RCS funders, including the ESSENCE on Health Research initiative, we identified themes that were important to health RCS funders and used these to guide a systematic analysis of their evaluation reports. Eighteen reports, produced between 2000 and 2013, representing 12 evaluations, were purposefully selected from 54 reports provided by the funders to provide maximum variety. Text from the reports was extracted independently by two authors against a pre-designed framework. Information about the health RCS approaches, tensions and suggested solutions was re-constructed into a narrative. Throughout the process contacts in the health RCS funder agencies were involved in helping us to validate and interpret our results. The focus of the health RCS evaluations ranged from individuals and institutions to national, regional and global levels. Our analysis identified tensions around how much stakeholders should participate in an evaluation, the appropriate balance between measuring and learning and between a focus on short-term processes vs longer-term impact and sustainability. Suggested solutions to these tensions included early and ongoing stakeholder engagement in planning and evaluating health RCS, modelling of impact pathways and rapid assimilation of lessons learned for continuous improvement of decision making and programming. The use of developmental approaches could improve health RCS evaluations by addressing common tensions and promoting sustainability. Sharing learning about how to do robust and useful health RCS evaluations should happen alongside, not after, health RCS effort

    Implementing a national health research for development platform in a low-income country – a review of Malawi’s Health Research Capacity Strengthening Initiative

    Get PDF
    Background National health research for development (R4D) platforms in lower income countries (LICs) are few. The Health Research Capacity Strengthening Initiative (HRCSI, 2008–2013) was a national systems-strengthening programme in Malawi involved in national priority setting, decision-making on funding, and health research actor mobilization. Methods We adopted a retrospective mixed-methods evaluation approach, starting with information gleaned from reports (HRCSI and Malawian) and databases (HRCSI). A framework of a health research system (actors and components) guided report review and interview guide development. From a list of 173 individuals involved in HRCSI, 30 interviewees were selected within categories of stakeholders. Interviews were conducted face-to-face or via telephone/Skype over 1 month, documented with extensive notes. Analysis of emerging themes was iterative among co-evaluators, with synthesis according to the implementation stage. Results Major HRCSI outputs included (1) National research priority-setting: through the production of themed background papers by Malawian health researchers and broad consultation, HRCSI led the development of a National Health Research Agenda (2012–2016), widely regarded as one of HRCSI’s foremost achievements. (2) Institutional research capacity: there was an overwhelming view that HRCSI had produced a step-change in the number of high calibre scientists in Malawi and in fostering research interest among young Malawians, providing support for around 56 MSc and PhD students, and over 400 undergraduate health-related projects. (3) Knowledge sharing: HRCSI supported research dissemination through national and institutional meetings by sponsoring attendance at conferences and through close relationships with individuals in the print media for disseminating information. (4) Sustainability: From 2011–2013, HRCSI significantly improved research systems, processes and leadership in Malawi, but further strengthening was needed for HRCSI to be effectively integrated into government structures and sustained long-term. Overall, HRCSI carried out many components relevant to a national health research system coordinating platform, and became competent at managing over half of 12 areas of performance for research councils. Debate about its location and challenges to sustainability remain open questions. Conclusions More experimentation in the setting-up of national health R4D platforms to promote country ‘ownership’ is needed, accompanied by evaluation processes that facilitate learning and knowledge exchange of better practices among key actors in health R4D systems

    Perspectives on evaluating global health research for development : a background paper - taking stock of current practice and ways to improve it

    Get PDF
    There is growing recognition of complex global challenges that affect all countries in terms of health research needs and capacities in low-income countries. These challenges require special approaches for evaluation of multi-disciplinary and inter-sectoral knowledge production and application. The report provides “research on research” regarding assessments and evaluation methods of impact and outcomes in Global Health Research for Development (GHR4D). Drawn from the literature review, several innovative approaches in the use of evaluation findings are described. Although most of these have been developed in high-income country settings, they could be adapted and tested with the evaluation of GHR4D in mind

    Community and household socioeconomic factors associated with pesticide-using, small farm household members' health: a multi-level, longitudinal analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Longitudinal studies using multi-level models to examine health inequalities in lower and middle income countries (LMICs) are rare. We explored socio-economic gradients in health among small farm members participating in a pesticide-related health and agriculture program in highland Ecuador.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We profiled 24 communities through key informant interviews, secondary data (percent of population with unsatisfied basic needs), and intervention implementation indicators. Pre (2005) and post (2007) surveys of the primary household and crop managers included common questions (education, age, and the health outcome - digit span scaled 0-10)) and pesticide-related practice questions specific to each. Household assets and pesticide use variables were shared across managers. We constructed multi-level models predicting 2007 digit span for each manager type, with staged introduction of predictor variables.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>376 household managers (79% of 2005 participants) and 380 crop managers (76% of 2005 participants) had complete data for analysis. The most important predictor of 2007 digit span was 2005 digit span: ÎČ (Standard Error) of 0.31(0.05) per unit for household and 0.17(0.04) for crop managers. Household asset score was next most important: 0.14(0.06) per unit for household and 0.14(0.05) for crop managers. Community percent with unsatisfied basic needs was associated with reductions in 2007 digit span: -0.04(0.01) per percent for household and -0.03(0.01) for crop managers.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The important roles of life endowments and/or persistent neurotoxicity were exemplified by limited change in the health outcome. Gradients by household assets and community deprivation were indicative of ongoing, structural inequities within this LMIC.</p

    The Overdensity in Virgo, Sagittarius Debris, and the Asymmetric Spheroid

    Full text link
    We investigate the relationship between several previously identified Galactic halo stellar structures in the direction of Virgo using imaging and spectroscopic observations of F turnoff stars and blue horizontal branch stars from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) and the Sloan Extension for Galactic Understanding and Exploration (SEGUE). We show that the Sagittarius dwarf leading tidal tail does not pass through the solar neighborhood; it misses the Sun by more than 15 kpc, passing through the Galactic plane outside the Solar Circle. It also is not spatially coincident with the large stellar overdensity S297+63-20.5 in the Virgo constellation. S297+63-20.5 has a distinct turnoff color and kinematics. Faint (g ~ 20.3) turnoff stars in S297+63-20.5 have line-of-sight, Galactic standard of rest velocities V(GSR)= 130 +/- 10 km/s, opposite in sign to infalling Sgr tail stars. The path of the Sgr leading tidal tail is also inconsistent with the positions of some of the nearer stars with which it has been associated, and whose velocities have favored models with prolate Milky Way potentials. We additionally show that the number densities of brighter (g ~ 19.8) F turnoff stars are not symmetric about the Galactic center, and that this discrepancy is not primarily due to the S297+63-20.5 moving group. Either the spheroid is asymmetric about the Galactic center, or there are additional substructures that conspire to be on the same side of the Galaxy as S297+63-20.5. The S297+63-20.5 overdensity in Virgo is likely associated with two other previously identified Virgo substructures: the Virgo Stellar Stream (VSS) and the Virgo Overdensity (VOD). However, the velocity difference between the VSS and S297+63-20.5 and the difference in distance estimates between the VOD and S297+63-20.5 must be reconciled.Comment: 10 figures, ApJ in pres
    • 

    corecore