4.3 Review

Systematic Literature Review on Indicators Use in Safety Management Practices among Utility Industries

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19106198

Keywords

safety management practices; leading indicators; safety performance; lagging indicators; occupational safety and health

Funding

  1. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia [SK-2020-011, SK-2021-011]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article examines the indicators used in safety management practices in utility industries. The results reveal three main performance indicators and 15 sub-indicators. Future research should explore a wider range of utility industries, measure subjective and objective indicators, integrate risk management into safety practices, and validate the influence of leading indicators on safety outcomes.
Background: Workers in utility industries are exposed to occupational accidents due to inadequate safety management systems. Accordingly, it is necessary to characterize and compare the available literature on indicators used in safety management practices in the utility industries. Methods: The systematic literature review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement. This study considered 25 related studies from Web of Science and Scopus databases. Results: Further review of these articles resulted in three mains performance indicators; namely, driven leading indicators, observant leading indicators, and lagging indicators consisting of 15 sub-indicators. Conclusions: Future studies should consider researching a more comprehensive range of utility industries, measuring subjective and objective indicators, integrating risk management into safety management practices, and validating the influence of leading indicators on safety outcomes. Further, researchers recommend including accidents, fatalities, lost time injuries, and near misses in safety outcomes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available