Occupational ICE: Progress and Direction
In an effort to broaden the international comparison of fatal occupational injuries to include more countries, a request was posted to the AdvICE listserve soliciting information about the availability of comparable data from other countries. The request specified the case selection criteria and parameters of fatality and workforce data necessary to harmonize with other national databases. Although several responses were received, no other national databases were identified that could meet the criteria necessary for comparability. At the Vienna meeting, a few ICE members expressed interest in exploring this possibility again, so we are in the process of re-examining the issue.
To address objectives set forth at the previous meeting of the Occupational ICE Committee (May 2003) information on the use of ICD-10 Activity Codes in national mortality data was solicited via the AdvICE listserve. The responses to the requests indicated that few countries are using these codes. For those that report using the codes, the vast majority of cases were coded “unknown.” The committee is distressed by this finding, considering the extraordinary amount of time and effort that went into developing this ICD modification that would capture work-related deaths. Discussions will continue on efforts to promote the use of ICD-10 Activity Codes on national mortality data collections. All ideas and input are welcome!
The collaboration with the US, New Zealand, and Australia on international comparisons of fatal occupational injuries continues with the newest analysis: ICE on the Road, a comparison of work-related motor vehicle deaths. The preliminary analysis was presented at the World Conference on Injury Prevention and Control in Vienna on June 7.
In addition to the above presentation, the Occupational ICE subcommittee organized an International Roundtable on Occupational Injury Prevention at the World Conference in Vienna. After brief presentations from the multiple countries, the roundtable sparked much discussion regarding differences in the state of occupational injury research prevention in developed versus developing countries and on the concept of “research to practice” and the importance of efforts to move research results into practice in the work place.