Time and knowledge barriers to recognizing occupational disease

Philip I Harber, Brenda Merz

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Traditionally, inadequate training has been considered the major barrier to recognition of occupational disease. A survey of 136 practitioners was conducted to determine which barriers were actually considered most relevant. The sample included three subgroups: primary care, occupational medicine-oriented, and Mexican. Four aggregate indices were derived: Knowledge, Time, Unpleasant aspects, and Importance. Inadequate Time was as important as inadequate Knowledge, whereas perceived lack of Importance and Unpleasant aspects were less relevant. Patterns among the subgroups were generally comparable. This study implies that training more occupational medicine specialists in increasing recognition is not sufficient unless specific strategies to overcome time constraints are also implemented. For example, emphasizing a "complete occupational history" may be counterproductive. Limiting histories to selected patients; use of focused, brief histories; and, perhaps, computer-based methods are needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)285-288
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of occupational and environmental medicine / American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Volume43
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2001
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Occupational Diseases
Occupational Medicine
Primary Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis

Cite this

@article{064fefb6bd1842a4bd296c5e62a4b598,
title = "Time and knowledge barriers to recognizing occupational disease",
abstract = "Traditionally, inadequate training has been considered the major barrier to recognition of occupational disease. A survey of 136 practitioners was conducted to determine which barriers were actually considered most relevant. The sample included three subgroups: primary care, occupational medicine-oriented, and Mexican. Four aggregate indices were derived: Knowledge, Time, Unpleasant aspects, and Importance. Inadequate Time was as important as inadequate Knowledge, whereas perceived lack of Importance and Unpleasant aspects were less relevant. Patterns among the subgroups were generally comparable. This study implies that training more occupational medicine specialists in increasing recognition is not sufficient unless specific strategies to overcome time constraints are also implemented. For example, emphasizing a {"}complete occupational history{"} may be counterproductive. Limiting histories to selected patients; use of focused, brief histories; and, perhaps, computer-based methods are needed.",
author = "Harber, {Philip I} and Brenda Merz",
year = "2001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "285--288",
journal = "Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine",
issn = "1076-2752",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Time and knowledge barriers to recognizing occupational disease

AU - Harber, Philip I

AU - Merz, Brenda

PY - 2001

Y1 - 2001

N2 - Traditionally, inadequate training has been considered the major barrier to recognition of occupational disease. A survey of 136 practitioners was conducted to determine which barriers were actually considered most relevant. The sample included three subgroups: primary care, occupational medicine-oriented, and Mexican. Four aggregate indices were derived: Knowledge, Time, Unpleasant aspects, and Importance. Inadequate Time was as important as inadequate Knowledge, whereas perceived lack of Importance and Unpleasant aspects were less relevant. Patterns among the subgroups were generally comparable. This study implies that training more occupational medicine specialists in increasing recognition is not sufficient unless specific strategies to overcome time constraints are also implemented. For example, emphasizing a "complete occupational history" may be counterproductive. Limiting histories to selected patients; use of focused, brief histories; and, perhaps, computer-based methods are needed.

AB - Traditionally, inadequate training has been considered the major barrier to recognition of occupational disease. A survey of 136 practitioners was conducted to determine which barriers were actually considered most relevant. The sample included three subgroups: primary care, occupational medicine-oriented, and Mexican. Four aggregate indices were derived: Knowledge, Time, Unpleasant aspects, and Importance. Inadequate Time was as important as inadequate Knowledge, whereas perceived lack of Importance and Unpleasant aspects were less relevant. Patterns among the subgroups were generally comparable. This study implies that training more occupational medicine specialists in increasing recognition is not sufficient unless specific strategies to overcome time constraints are also implemented. For example, emphasizing a "complete occupational history" may be counterproductive. Limiting histories to selected patients; use of focused, brief histories; and, perhaps, computer-based methods are needed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0035078805&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0035078805&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 11285877

AN - SCOPUS:0035078805

VL - 43

SP - 285

EP - 288

JO - Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

JF - Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine

SN - 1076-2752

IS - 3

ER -