van der Beek A J, Frings-Dresen M H, van Dijk F J, Houtman I L
Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Coronel Institute for Occupational and Environmental Health, The Netherlands.
Occup Environ Med. 1997 Jul;54(7):504-10. doi: 10.1136/oem.54.7.504.
To achieve a coherent programme of topics for research in occupational health and safety, with well founded priorities and to relate them to perceived gaps and needs in The Netherlands.
In the first phase of the study 33 key informants were interviewed. In the second phase questionnaires were sent to 150 Dutch experts (including the key informants). Four groups were recruited, originating from: occupational health and safety services; scientific research institutes; governmental and other administrative bodies; and companies. Using the Delphi technique, the experts were asked to prioritize several topics, which were placed under different headings. In the third phase five workshops were organised to elaborate on the highly prioritized topics.
The response rates were 86% for the first and 81% for the second questionnaire. In the second round consistency was reached and consensus proved to be satisfactory; so that the Delphi process was stopped. There were surprisingly few differences in opinion between the four groups. The most important heading was "design/implementation/evaluation of measures", in which the topic cost-benefit analysis of measures had the highest score. "Assessment of relations between exposure and effect" was the second most important heading. Under this heading, topics on work stress were generally judged to be more important than topics on safety and biological, chemical, and physical hazards. The headings "occupational rehabilitation/sociomedical guidance" and "occupational health care/occupational health services" had about the sam priority, closely following the heading "assessment of relations between exposure and effect".
The general agreement on priorities should provide a sufficiently broad basis for decision makers to initiate a long term programme for occupational health research and development in The Netherlands.
制定一个连贯的职业健康与安全研究主题计划，确定有充分依据的优先事项，并将其与荷兰已认识到的差距和需求联系起来。
在研究的第一阶段，对33名关键信息提供者进行了访谈。在第二阶段，向150名荷兰专家（包括关键信息提供者）发放了问卷。招募了四个小组，分别来自：职业健康与安全服务机构；科研机构；政府及其他行政机构；以及公司。运用德尔菲技术，要求专家们对若干主题进行优先级排序，这些主题被归在不同的标题下。在第三阶段，组织了五场研讨会，以详细阐述高度优先的主题。
第一份问卷的回复率为86%，第二份问卷的回复率为81%。在第二轮中达成了一致性，共识被证明是令人满意的；因此德尔菲过程停止。四个小组之间的意见差异出奇地少。最重要的标题是“措施的设计/实施/评估”，其中措施的成本效益分析主题得分最高。“暴露与影响之间关系的评估”是第二重要的标题。在这个标题下，工作压力方面的主题通常被认为比安全以及生物、化学和物理危害方面的主题更重要。“职业康复/社会医学指导”和 “职业医疗保健/职业健康服务” 这两个标题的优先级大致相同，紧随 “暴露与影响之间关系的评估” 之后。
关于优先事项的总体共识应为决策者启动荷兰职业健康研究与发展的长期计划提供足够广泛的基础。
