Handheld-assisted field data collection for occupational risk assessment.

A computerized handheld procedure is presented in this paper. It is intended as a database complementary tool, to enhance prospective risk analysis in the field of occupational health. The Pendragon forms software (version 3.2) has been used to implement acquisition procedures on Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) and to transfer data to a computer in an MS-Access format. The data acquisition strategy proposed relies on the risk assessment method practiced at the Institute of Occupational Health Sciences (IST). It involves the use of a systematic hazard list and semi-quantitative risk assessment scales. A set of 7 modular forms has been developed to cover the basic need of field audits. Despite the minor drawbacks observed, the results obtained so far show that handhelds are adequate to support field risk assessment and follow-up activities. Further improvements must still be made in order to increase the tool effectiveness and field adequacy.

Engorgement des centres d'urgences: une raison légitime de refuser l'accès aux patients non urgents [Emergency department overcrowding: a legitimate reason to refuse access to urgent care for non-urgent patients?].

Non-urgent cases represent 30-40% of all ED consults; they contribute to overcrowding of emergency departments (ED), which could be reduced if they were denied emergency care. However, no triage instrument has demonstrated a high enough degree of accuracy to safely rule out serious medical conditions: patients suffering from life-threatening emergencies have been inappropriately denied care. Insurance companies have instituted financial penalties to discourage the use of ED as a source of non-urgent care, but this practice mainly restricts access for the underprivileged. More recent data suggest that in fact most patients consult for appropriate urgent reasons, or have no alternate access to urgent care. The safe reduction of overcrowding requires a reform of the healthcare system based on patients' needs rather than access barriers.

Why did Swiss citizens refuse a comprehensive second-hand smoke ban?

The ill effects of second-hand smoke are now well documented. To protect the population from exposure to tobacco smoke, comprehensive smoking bans are necessary as expressed in the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and its guidelines. Switzerland has only a partial smoking ban full of exceptions which has been in effect since 2010, which reproduces the so-called Spanish model. In September 2012, the Swiss citizens refused a proposal for a more comprehensive ban. This case study examines the reasons behind this rejection and draws some lessons that can be learnt from it.