American Journal Of Medicine

Background The evaluation of causality in cancers associated with firefighting presents problems common to other applications of occupational epidemiology in adjudication of individual claims for workers' compensation. A trend in Canada to establish legislated presumptions for compensation of firefighters created an opportunity to re-evaluate the literature applying medicolegal standards of certainty.

Objective To evaluate causality in selected cancer categories for firefighters using the criteria applied in tort litigation and workers' compensation, which is based on the weight of evidence and which is required to take into account individual factors.

Methods The epidemiological literature on cancer risk among firefighters was reviewed based on the weight of evidence rather than scientific certainty. Generalizable frameworks were formulated to define recurrent issues in assessing the evidence from epidemiological studies. The evidence for latency and for a threshold effect with duration of employment was also examined in order to provide practical guidelines.

Results Presumption is justified for the following cancers: bladder, kidney, testicular and brain, and lung cancer among non-smokers. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, leukaemia and myeloma (each as a class) not only present particular problems in assessment but also merit an assumption of presumption. Four analytical frameworks describe the problems in analysis encountered.

Discussion The preponderance of evidence supports the presumption of causation for certain cancer, mostly rare. These frameworks are applicable to other problems of adjudication that rest on interpretation of epidemiological data. The named cancers, taking into account the special assessment issues described by each framework, are supported by sufficient evidence to conclude that a presumption is warranted but not necessarily sufficient evidence to accept as proof by a scientific standard.

Background There is difficulty in defining occupational health services among stakeholders of the service. Concurrently, there are concerns about the state of occupational health provision in the UK.

Aims To determine stakeholders' perception of the services that occupational health encompasses and the level as well as the rationale behind the provision of these services.

Methods The research was undertaken as a postal questionnaire survey of the FTSE 350 companies and selected public sector organizations in the UK. This was followed up by telephone calls to a random selection of non-respondents to obtain non-respondent data.

Results There is a difference in opinion among managers and occupational health professionals about the services provided by occupational health. Taking into account non-respondent data to partially adjust for overestimation biases, the level of provision of occupational health services among the FTSE 350 companies is 69% and in public sector organizations is 95%, giving an average provision of 72%. Sixteen per cent of respondents thought there was a trend towards outsourcing of services. The most frequently cited reason for provision of an occupational health service was that it was for the benefit of employees.

Conclusions There remains room for improvement in the level of occupational health services provision in large UK private sector organizations. By bridging the gap between the different stakeholders' perceptions of the remit and benefits of the service, a higher level of provision in the private sector similar to that of public sector organizations can be achieved.