Intervention Review

You have free access to this content

Occupational safety and health enforcement tools for preventing occupational diseases and injuries

  1. Christina Mischke1,*,
  2. Jos H Verbeek1,
  3. Jenny Job2,
  4. Thais C Morata3,
  5. Anne Alvesalo-Kuusi4,
  6. Kaisa Neuvonen5,
  7. Simon Clarke6,
  8. Robert I Pedlow7

Editorial Group: Cochrane Work Group

Published Online: 30 AUG 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 20 MAR 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010183.pub2


How to Cite

Mischke C, Verbeek JH, Job J, Morata TC, Alvesalo-Kuusi A, Neuvonen K, Clarke S, Pedlow RI. Occupational safety and health enforcement tools for preventing occupational diseases and injuries. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 8. Art. No.: CD010183. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010183.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group, Kuopio, Finland

  2. 2

    Safe Work Australia, Strategic Policy Branch, Canberra, ACT, Australia

  3. 3

    National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Cincinnati, OH, USA

  4. 4

    University of Turku, Faculty of Law, Turku, Finland

  5. 5

    Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group, Helsinki, Finland

  6. 6

    UK Health and Safety Executive, Merseyside, UK

  7. 7

    Safe Work Australia, Research and Evaluation Team, Canberra, ACT, Australia

*Christina Mischke, Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Neulaniementie 4, PO Box 310, Kuopio, 70101, Finland. christina.mischke@ttl.fi. tinamischke@gmx.de.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: New
  2. Published Online: 30 AUG 2013

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Effects of occupational safety and health regulation enforcement tools
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Effects of specific occupational safety and health regulation enforcement tools
[Figure 3]
Figure 3. Flow diagram.
[Figure 4]
Figure 4. 'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
[Figure 5]
Figure 5. 'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study.
[Analysis 1.1]
Analysis 1.1. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 1 Non-fatal injuries, short-term, RCT.
[Analysis 1.2]
Analysis 1.2. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 2 Fatal and non-fatal injuries, short-term, CBA.
[Analysis 1.3]
Analysis 1.3. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 3 Non-fatal injuries, short-term, panel study.
[Analysis 1.4]
Analysis 1.4. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 4 Fatal and non-fatal injuries, medium-term, CBA.
[Analysis 1.5]
Analysis 1.5. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 5 Non-fatal injuries, medium-term, panel study.
[Analysis 1.6]
Analysis 1.6. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 6 Fatal and non-fatal injuries, long-term, CBA.
[Analysis 1.7]
Analysis 1.7. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 7 Fatal and non-fatal injuries, long-term, ITS-level.
[Analysis 1.8]
Analysis 1.8. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 8 Fatal and non-fatal injuries, long-term, ITS-slope.
[Analysis 1.9]
Analysis 1.9. Comparison 1 Inspection versus no intervention, Outcome 9 Reduced Exposure, medium-term, RCT.
[Analysis 2.1]
Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Inspection type versus any other type of Inspection with or without penalties, Outcome 1 Short-term, exposure (compliance; < 1 violation), panel study.
[Analysis 3.1]
Analysis 3.1. Comparison 3 Inspection with citation versus inspection without citation, Outcome 1 Short-term, non-fatal injuries, panel study.
[Analysis 3.2]
Analysis 3.2. Comparison 3 Inspection with citation versus inspection without citation, Outcome 2 Medium-term, non-fatal injuries, panel studies.
[Analysis 4.1]
Analysis 4.1. Comparison 4 Inspection with penalty versus no intervention or inspection only, Outcome 1 Short-term, non-fatal injury, panel study.
[Analysis 4.2]
Analysis 4.2. Comparison 4 Inspection with penalty versus no intervention or inspection only, Outcome 2 Medium-term, non-fatal injury, panel study.
[Analysis 5.1]
Analysis 5.1. Comparison 5 More penalties versus fewer penalties, Outcome 1 Short-term, exposure compliance (< 1 violation), panel study.
[Analysis 6.1]
Analysis 6.1. Comparison 6 First inspection versus more than one inspection, Outcome 1 Short-term, exposure compliance (< 1 violation), panel study.
[Analysis 7.1]
Analysis 7.1. Comparison 7 Six inspections versus more than six inspections, Outcome 1 Short-term, exposure compliance (< 1 violation), panel study.
[Analysis 8.1]
Analysis 8.1. Comparison 8 More inspection hours versus fewer hours, Outcome 1 Short-term, exposure compliance (< 1 violation), panel study.
[Analysis 9.1]
Analysis 9.1. Comparison 9 Autonomy oriented versus coercive oriented inspectors, Outcome 1 Long-term, exposure (number of visits needed to resolve non-compliance), panel study.