Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
201,818 studies31 sourcesUpdated 4 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDBMC public health

A risk management intervention in Australian hospital food service departments: an evaluation using the RE-AIM framework.

4 affiliations
  1. 1Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors, Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia. [email protected].
  2. 2Centre for Ergonomics and Human Factors, Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.
  3. 3Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.
  4. 4Department of Public Health, La Trobe University, Plenty Road and Kingsbury Drive, Bundoora, VIC, 3086, Australia.

Abstract

Background

The RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework was used to undertake a process evaluation of a workplace intervention using the A Participative Hazard Identification and Risk Management (APHIRM) Toolkit. The aim of the intervention was to reduce work-related physical and psychosocial hazards associated with musculoskeletal disorders and stress related mental health in hospital food services employees. This study aimed to evaluate the process undertaken to support implementation of the APHIRM toolkit.Method

Qualitative and quantitative data collected from individual participants, research team observations and organisations were used to report on the five dimensions of the RE-AIM framework and explore the implementation process of the APHIRM toolkit (the intervention).Results

Organisations reported a range of strategies to improve reach of the intervention, with variability across different work groups. Common challenges reported related to senior management support, communication and competing organisational priorities. A key strength of the APHIRM toolkit is the prioritisation of physical and psychosocial hazards and the opportunities for dialogue between workers and management and supervisors that do not normally exist.Conclusions

This process evaluation of the intervention offered valuable insights which can be used to improve the APHIRM toolkit's resources, tools, and training. It highlighted ongoing challenges in addressing psychosocial hazards and the important role of the toolkit in providing workers with an opportunity to be involved in developing tailored risk controls, through the use of a highly participative approach. For the hospital food service employees involved, this participatory approach was novel. Findings from this evaluation will inform modification of guidance and training provided within the APHIRM toolkit.

Related

  1. Mental health-related presentations to Australian hospital emergency departments by children and young people, before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
    Jackson Newberry-Dupé, Simon Craig, Glenn Melvin +6
    BMC emergency medicinePeer-reviewedCC BYFull textPsychiatry & mental healthEurope PMCDOAJ
  2. Evaluation of a Contingency Management Intervention to Treat Substance Use Disorders in a Family Medicine Residency Program: A Retrospective Observational Review Study of Patient Outcomes and Experiences.
    Kimberly D Williams, Deanna Gorgei, Kendall McDowell +2
    Delaware journal of public healthPeer-reviewedCC BY-NC-NDFull textEpidemiology & public healthEurope PMCPMC
  3. Changing Patterns of Transient Ischemic Attack Evaluation in US Emergency Departments
    Lauren E. Mamer, James A. Cranford, Jingze Li +4
    JAMA NeurologyPeer-reviewedLicence not statedFull textEpidemiology & public healthPMC
  4. Impact evaluation of Lean Healthcare in emergency departments: evidence from a large-scale Brazilian initiative using difference-in-differences
    F. A. S. de Araujo, J. N. R. Ikawa, A. d. S. Lima +2
    medRxivPreprintAll rights reservedFull textEpidemiology & public healthmedRxiv
  5. Adaptation needs of an intervention to facilitate tobacco cessation among men attending emergency departments in Nairobi, Kenya
    M. Armstrong-Hough, T. Kedera, M. Bosire +5
    medRxivPreprintCC BYFull textEpidemiology & public healthmedRxiv
BibTeX
@article{oakman2026risk,
  title = {{A risk management intervention in Australian hospital food service departments: an evaluation using the RE-AIM framework.}},
  author = {Jodi Oakman and Jasmine Love and Joanne Marcucci},
  journal = {BMC public health},
  year = {2026},
  month = jul,
  doi = {10.1186/s12889-026-28638-w},
  url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894166},
  note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - A risk management intervention in Australian hospital food service departments: an evaluation using the RE-AIM framework.
AU  - Jodi Oakman
AU  - Jasmine Love
AU  - Joanne Marcucci
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/07/01
JO  - BMC public health
DO  - 10.1186/s12889-026-28638-w
UR  - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42894166
AB  - Background  The RE-AIM (reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance) framework was used to undertake a process evaluation of a workplace intervention using the A Participative Hazard Identification and Risk Management (APHIRM) Toolkit. The aim of the intervention was to reduce work-related physical and psychosocial hazards associated with musculoskeletal disorders and stress related mental health in hospital food services employees. This study aimed to evaluate the process undertaken to support implementation of the APHIRM toolkit.Method  Qualitative and quantitative data collected from individual participants, research team observations and organisations were used to report on the five dimensions of the RE-AIM framework and explore the implementation process of the APHIRM toolkit (the intervention).Results  Organisations reported a range of strategies to improve reach of the intervention, with variability across different work groups. Common challenges reported related to senior management support, communication and competing organisational priorities. A key strength of the APHIRM toolkit is the prioritisation of physical and psychosocial hazards and the opportunities for dialogue between workers and management and supervisors that do not normally exist.Conclusions  This process evaluation of the intervention offered valuable insights which can be used to improve the APHIRM toolkit's resources, tools, and training. It highlighted ongoing challenges in addressing psychosocial hazards and the important role of the toolkit in providing workers with an opportunity to be involved in developing tailored risk controls, through the use of a highly participative approach. For the hospital food service employees involved, this participatory approach was novel. Findings from this evaluation will inform modification of guidance and training provided within the APHIRM toolkit.
SN  - 1471-2458
ER  -