Healthy workplace indicators in Thailand: phase 2 (a pilot study).

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorSithisarankul, Pornchaien_US
dc.contributor.authorPunpeng, Twisuken_US
dc.contributor.authorBoonchoo, Sujitraen_US
dc.contributor.authorBaikrai, Udomlaken_US
dc.date.accessioned2009-05-27T21:12:59Z
dc.date.available2009-05-27T21:12:59Z
dc.date.issued2003-06-22en_US
dc.descriptionChotmaihet Thangphaet.en_US
dc.description.abstractThis 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. Questionnaires were sent to 180 workplaces in Samutprakarn 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.en_US
dc.description.affiliationDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSithisarankul P, Punpeng T, Boonchoo S, Baikrai U. Healthy workplace indicators in Thailand: phase 2 (a pilot study). Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand. 2003 Jun; 86 Suppl 2(): S271-83en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://imsear.searo.who.int/handle/123456789/44400
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.mat.or.th/journal/all.phpen_US
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Status Indicatorsen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshOccupational Healthen_US
dc.subject.meshPilot Projectsen_US
dc.subject.meshThailanden_US
dc.subject.meshWorkplaceen_US
dc.titleHealthy workplace indicators in Thailand: phase 2 (a pilot study).en_US
dc.typeEvaluation Studiesen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.typeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'ten_US
Files
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.79 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description:
Download
Collections
Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand