Display Screen Equipment Related injuries and how to avoid them by using Management & leadership intervention.

Authors Avatar

Risk Assessment Report

 

Display Screen Equipment Related injuries and how to avoid them by using Management & leadership intervention

 

 

Introduction:

 

I have chosen the above topic for my report as both routine clerical work and tedious managerial work within the office has become dependent on the computer. 

 

Background:

 

I currently manage two data entry clerks directly within my sphere of responsibilities and am accountable for their health and safety whilst at work. Although the unit has 3 desk computers, we have not had a Risk Assessment (RA) carried out in the past three years.

 

The aim of this report is to reduce the risk associated with using Display Screen Equipment (DSE) to the lowest practicable level on a day-to-day basis.

 

I will be looking at the workstation assessment form from Risk Management to identify potential risk staffs are being exposed to by working with DSE. The risk assessment that I would carry would be in line with the Trust Risk Management policy as well as the frameworks learned and used in this management module and relevant legislation.

 

Legislation has been put in place to protect computer operators from the risks inherent of computer use. The United Kingdom (1992) Display Screen Regulations set out the legal requirements of employers with regards to their computer users. The Management of health & safety at work regulations (MHSW) came into force in December 1999 in conjunction with the Health & Safety Act 1974.

 

My report will be based on the Clinical leadership theory by Jumaa and Alleyne (1998). The Clinlap/ leadlap model is identified as “strategic management and leadership process that positions processes learning as a force that drives health and social care organisation on a day to day basis in the management of goals, roles, processes and relationships (Jumaa 2001).

 

The purpose of this report is to improve our awareness of and the management of Risks for computer users.

 

The Objective is to:

 

  • To minimise the injuries associated with DSE
  • To reduce absenteeism
  • To prevent litigation
  • To protect the Trust Reputation

 

 

 

 To help achieve the above specific goals, I will use the stakeholder map to identify the different stakeholders within my unit in the organisation.

 

STAKEHOLDER MAP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Looking at the above stakeholder map, each area will have different interest. These stakeholders have a keen interest in the way the organisation is run therefore by identifying them I can have a balanced view of taking everybody into account when making proposals. This is crucial to their commitment to achieve change.

 

 

         Please see Appendix 1 for Table 1 & 2 for the stakeholders Matrix analysis

 

 

In order to set the objectives I have used S.M.A.R.T., A.S.T.R.E.A.M 

 

 

Specific- There has been an ongoing problem with neck, back pain and RSI caused by DSE.

 

Measurable: Absenteeism is high due to illness caused by DSE related pain

 

Agreeable- Improving the quality of lives and practice by minimising injury.

 

Relevant: Ongoing problem for the past 3years can be applied across all departments where DSE is used.

 

Time: The goal for improving the quality of lives will be implemented within the next three months and evaluated three months later post implementation.

 

Empower:  Staff concerns should be considered when empowering them through teaching and training.

The next section of this report will be looking at Policies of Risk Management in place at strategic level within the organisation but not implemented in all departments.

 

 The LOOP factor is described by Jumaa and Alleyne 1998a, 1998b and Jumaa 2000a and stands for: Legislation, organisational, occupational and personal factors. (See Appendix 2 for further discussion about LOOP factors)

 

In this report I am proposing that we look at the culture web by to identify factors that inhibits an effective implementation of Risk Management.

To improve my practice as a risk assessor, I have incorporated Johnson (1988) (see Appendix 3) to look at the rituals and routines, organisational structures and control systems of the Trust.

 

I will now consider the LOOP factors framework, which will help to identify some factors that inhibit team working in managing risks and therefore allow us to establish of what needs to be done next. Please see Appendix 2 for further discussion.

 

I will use P.E.S.T.O framework to show the influence of the Trust’s strategy for a need of review and implementation of existing policies.

 

P.E.S.T.O.stands for: Political, Economical, sociological, Technological and other factors such as Environmental policy, procedures, guidelines and standards all of which have an impact on the Trust as an Organisation.

 

For the brevity of this report, I will assume that the External environment of the organisation is thinking strategically and the political influence such as the Department of Health Guidelines for Clinical Governance, NHS Plan 2000, and Commission for Health Improvement (CHI) is providing guidance for the organisation to succeed and achieve its targets.

 

I will use McKinsey’s 7s Framework to analyse the structure of the organisation and how it operates. 7S are seven aspects of an organisation that need to harmonise with each other in order to support the others or be “organised” (Waterman and Phillips 1980). They are:

 

Strategy:  Our organisation is to provide an audit tool to identify the gaps in the direction and planning of the organisation to assess the extent to which the organisation finite resources can reach identified goals.

 

For e.g. my unit has not had a risk officer carrying out a risk assessment in the past 3 years although the Trust has its strategy in place, there is no direction and no system in place.

 

Structure: includes questions that will help us to identify the location of the Risk Management teams in the Trust, and to consider the support currently available to the teams and the evaluation of current policies.

 

Systems: Systems provide information on how to provide support for teams, for e.g. there are policies and protocols in place, which has not been set into practice. Guidance on how to develop effective inner-team working to manage risk systematically and consistently is not addressed.

 

Staff: To empower staff through education and training and by providing information accurately on how to minimise risk whilst using computers.

 

Style: Provides information on how key managers behave in order to provide support that will promote better Risk Management.

 

Shared Values: The significant meanings or guiding concepts on how to develop a team-based organisation to minimise risk.

 

Skills: Distinctive capabilities of key personnel to be identified within the organisation as a whole.

 

I will carry out a S.W.O.T analysis to identify the internal environment of my unit within the organisation. S.W.O.T stands for

 

Strength: Staffs have acknowledged that there is a problem and is willing to take further training and to be educated regarding using the computer appropriately. It is however expensive to train skilful workforce that can deliver effective services, but the long term benefit of such investment will reduce litigation, absenteeism, litigation and boost morale.

 

Weakness: There is a policy in place, which is not implemented across all departments and there is lack of knowledge of it.

 

Opportunities: To Embrace change without fear or threats

 

Threats: Fear of cost, change, being punished (Less money to spend) for not achieving targets as Trust is being measured and performance being rewarded with stars.

 

There is more than one way of achieving our goals; however we are constrained by the resources and capabilities available to us.

 

The next section will concentrate on the key capabilities in relation to Risk Assessment. I will use T.H.E.I.M.M framework developed by Jumaa and All (1998) to identify and use resources efficiently.

 

 

 

Ishikawa Diagram is a cost and effective analysis

 

 

        T                        H                       E

 

 

Solutions                                                             Problems

 

 

 

 

                    I                         M                          M

 

 

The above framework stands for input activities via Time, Human, Information, Equipment, Material and Money. The transformation of the above would be our output to support my plan for transforming the staff members’ interests in order to deliver Quality services.

The Key success factors for my unit would be:

 

  • A productive working team with improves morale.
  • Adequate staff to provide high quality of work
  • Reduced absenteeism
  • Reduced litigation and protect Trust reputation

 

 

There is a risk assessment policy that exists as part of the policies & procedures for the Trust, although the trust has to meet the legislations that is already in place for risk Assessment, current practice system does not reflect this. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 states that manager must provide a safe working environment.

 

As a manager there are certain legal responsibilities that I am accountable for within my unit. New guidance on using computers and preventing Repetitive Strain Injury (RSI) at work and musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), such as backaches was last published by the Health and Safety Executives (February 2003).

 

There are about 1.1 million people in Great Britain suffering from MSDs caused or made worse by work, in 2001/2002.

 

I identified a gap for the need of Risk assessment to be performed within my unit as staffs have been complaining of neck pain and back pain, which as a result have taken sickness leave. Although Risk Management is on the agenda of each level of the trust, it is not systematic and consistent across all the departments.

 

I believe that by taking a preventative action in the workplace can reduce the Trust as an organisation from disrepute. Indeed it is likely to be far more expensive for Trust and their insurers to ignore RSI, which may lead not only to compensation claims, but also to costs arising from sickness absences and reduced productivity.

 

I have carried out a Risk Assessment according to the Trust Policy and the assessment tool designed by the Trust; the findings are (Please see results in Appendix 5)

 

The Trust Policy and procedures in relation to Risk Management is in (Appendix 6.)

 

In light of the above, I am going to try and ascertain which direction to take.

 

There are Government White Papers such as Clinical Governance, Department of Health (DOH) modernisation agenda, Commission for Health Improvement (CHI), that are in place to direct the organisation to meet its goals and targets.

 

There are also legal responsibilities on organisation to provide a safe effective working environment for staff. However there is always the question of resources, and how can a working environment become safe in the most efficient way without spending.

 

The strength and weakness of my organisation can be evaluated through the 7Es. I will now use 7Es for feedback and evaluation; they can be described as the following (Jumaa1999b) (see appendix 4 for further details)

  • Economic
  • Efficiently
  • Effectiveness
  • Equity
  • Environment
  • Empowerment 

 

Conclusion

 

In light of what I have presented, Risk Assessment needs to be a priority in my unit. I set out with specific goals to manage risk with the intervention of management and Leadership in my unit within the East London And The City Mental Health Trust (ELCMHT). The gap that I have identified is lack of interprofessional working together as there is a need for systems that meet legal requirement to work together to understand own role clearly so others can understand it and the knowledge skills and attitudes required for collaboration with others (CAIPES Bulletin, Winter, 1994,p12)

             Caipe’s interprofessional competences

1.Confidence and competence in one’s own professional expertise

2.A ability to understand and value the specialist roles and skills of other professionals such as a Risk Officer

3. An ability to articulate one’s own roles and skills clearly so others can understand it; and

4. The knowledge skills and attitudes required for collaboration with others.

 

 

Recommendations:

 

  1. This report has found that there is a need for Risk Assessment in the One 4 One Office. Current Risk Assessment is not meeting our needs.
  2. Training- high quality and appropriate training should be in place for management, clinical and non-clinical staff. The trust should monitor uptake and attendance at refresher training provided for staff and management.
  3. Risk Assessment is to be carried out on a 6 monthly basis and reviewed.
  4. Good Ergonomic design of workplace and behavioural practices must be reinforced trough training and education to prevent debilitating effect of computer related injury.
  5. In order to improve services and reduce risk, the Trust should consult all staff and get as many people on board as possible.

 

The 1992 Display Screen Equipment lay down the following areas of responsibility for employers:

 

  • All Computers must fit a minimum specification for healthy use.
  • All workstations must be assessed for risk.
  • Computer equipment must be fit for the job to avoid strains and discomfort.
  • All users must be made to take regular breaks from computer work.
  • Eye tests and special glasses must be provided if requested.
  • Training on computer safety must be provided to all computer users.
  • Users must be given relevant information relating to their health and safety.

 

 

On reflection, for the implementation process to take place, there will be the need of resources. However greater financial threat may come from injured employees claiming compensation from the employer for injuries sustained at work, the loss in productivity through absence or reduced work rate and the loss of morale throughout the organisation caused by the injured employee.

 

By implementing the key success factors, we would have achieved the goals we set out to. We would have added value to the stakeholder’s quality of life as well as meeting the organisations goals. A minimal investment of time and money will protect staff from injury.

Join now!

Around 1.1 million people in Great Britain suffered from MSDs caused or made worse by work, in 2001/02.  An estimated 12.3 million working days were lost due to work related MSDs and on average each sufferer took 19.4 days off in 2001/02. These figures include upper limb disorders from which approximately 400,000 suffered, resulting in a loss of around four million working days in the same period. MSD web pages on the HSE site: .

The goals we had set out to achieve were:

 

  • Minimal injuries associated with DSE
  • Low absenteeism
  • Prevention ...

This is a preview of the whole essay