Views: 1,423 | Downloads:
26
| Responses: 0
| XML | Respond to this article | Alert & updates | Request permissions | Email to a friend |
Original ArticleOpen Access
Healthy Workplace Indicators in Thailand :Phase 2 (A Pilot Study)
Sithisarankul P 
,
Punpeng T ,
Boonchoo S ,
Baikrai MU
,
Punpeng T ,
Boonchoo S ,
Baikrai MU TWISUK PUNPENG, BSc, DSc**,
UDOMLAK BAIKRAI, Dip.Ns, MSc****
This study was a result of the second phase of a two-phase research project. In the previous
phase, the draft of healthy workplace indicators was developed by means of literature review and
soliciting of expert opinion. There were 46 indicators divided into 6 different groups. This phase of the
project was a quantitative cross-sectional descriptive study which aimed at exploring the opinion of
employers and occupational health officers (OHOs) of the enterprises towards the pilot set of healthy
workplace indicators. The field data collection was conducted by means of a postal survey. Question-
naires were sent to 180 workplaces in Samutprakam province. The response rates of employers and
OHOs were 66.7 per cent (n
=
120) and 68.3 per cent (n
=
123), respectively.
It
was found that the
majority of the enterprises had a workplace health promotion policy (59.3% ), had health promotion
activities (60.2% ), did not have designated personnel responsible for health promotion (69.1% ), had a
health promotion budget (53.7%), were large scale enterprises (61.0%), and did not have a mother
enterprise in foreign country (81.3%). In general, the mean scores of the opinions of employers and
OHOs toward indicators in the appropriateness aspect were high. For the achievability aspect, there
were 9 indicators which less than half of the employers thought they could achieve, and 10 indicators
that less than half of the OHOs thought they could achieve. The opinion of employers and OHOs
differed significantly in 4 indicators in the appropriateness aspect and 1 indicator in the achievability
aspect.
In conclusion, both the employers and OHOs considered most of these indicators appropriate
for the enterprises and most indicators were achievable and useful as a guideline and evaluation tool
for workplace health promotion.
Key word : Healthy Workplace Indicators, Workplace Health Promotion
UDOMLAK BAIKRAI, Dip.Ns, MSc****
This study was a result of the second phase of a two-phase research project. In the previous
phase, the draft of healthy workplace indicators was developed by means of literature review and
soliciting of expert opinion. There were 46 indicators divided into 6 different groups. This phase of the
project was a quantitative cross-sectional descriptive study which aimed at exploring the opinion of
employers and occupational health officers (OHOs) of the enterprises towards the pilot set of healthy
workplace indicators. The field data collection was conducted by means of a postal survey. Question-
naires were sent to 180 workplaces in Samutprakam province. The response rates of employers and
OHOs were 66.7 per cent (n
=
120) and 68.3 per cent (n
=
123), respectively.
It
was found that the
majority of the enterprises had a workplace health promotion policy (59.3% ), had health promotion
activities (60.2% ), did not have designated personnel responsible for health promotion (69.1% ), had a
health promotion budget (53.7%), were large scale enterprises (61.0%), and did not have a mother
enterprise in foreign country (81.3%). In general, the mean scores of the opinions of employers and
OHOs toward indicators in the appropriateness aspect were high. For the achievability aspect, there
were 9 indicators which less than half of the employers thought they could achieve, and 10 indicators
that less than half of the OHOs thought they could achieve. The opinion of employers and OHOs
differed significantly in 4 indicators in the appropriateness aspect and 1 indicator in the achievability
aspect.
In conclusion, both the employers and OHOs considered most of these indicators appropriate
for the enterprises and most indicators were achievable and useful as a guideline and evaluation tool
for workplace health promotion.
Key word : Healthy Workplace Indicators, Workplace Health Promotion
Download:
PDF