Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search

Search Results

Animal-related injuries: a population-based study of a five-state region in the upper midwest: regional rural injury study II.

Authors
Erkal-S; Goodwin Gerberich-S; Ryan-AD; Renier-CM; Alexander-BH
Source
J Saf Res 2008 Sep; 39(4):351-363
NIOSHTIC No.
20042172
Abstract
PROBLEM: While agricultural injury has been identified among the major causes of occupational injury mortality and morbidity, data have been limited pertinent to the magnitude, consequences, and potential risk factors for animal-related injuries - a major source of morbidity among agricultural operations. METHODS: Demographics, exposure, and injury data were collected for 1999 and 2001 among agricultural households in a five-state region. Causal models facilitated survey design, data analyses, and interpretation of results; directed acyclic graphs guided multivariate modeling. RESULTS: From 7,420 households (84% response of eligible), a total of 5,045 injury events were reported; 1,016 (20.1%) were animal-related. Multivariate analyses revealed increased risks for those <20 years; residents of all states compared to Minnesota; all age groups compared to 0-4 years; >0 hours worked; and prior agricultural injury history. For those 20+ years, increased risks were identified for: South Dakota residents; males; >0 hours worked; and prior agricultural injury history. For those cases <20 and 20+ years of age, 58% and 46%, respectively, resulted in lost work time on their agricultural operations (31% and 50%, one week or more). CONCLUSIONS: Animal-related injury has a major impact on the agricultural industry. Results serve as a basis for interventions and further research. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The impact of animal-related injuries on the agricultural industry appears significant; among age groups <20 and 20+, 85% and 82%, respectively, had some resulting restriction. For all events combined, 29% and 30%, respectively, involved restriction from one week to 3+ months; 12% and 15% involved restriction for one month or more. Among those <20 and 20+ years of age, 58% and 46%, respectively, lost work time on their own agricultural operation as a result of injuries associated with their own operation; 22% and 15% lost one week or more. Moreover, of the non-agriculture-related injuries, 31% and 50% resulted in lost work time on their own operation; 15% and 28%, respectively, lost one week or more. Restrictions such as these can affect the productivity of the operation, resulting in financial impacts, especially on small operations that have few people to manage the required tasks.
Keywords
Agricultural-processes; Agricultural-workers; Agriculture; Families; Farmers; Animal-husbandry; Animal-husbandry-workers; Injuries; Injury-prevention; Hazards; Risk-analysis; Epidemiology; Surveillance-programs; Safety-measures; Work-operations; Work-performance; Work-practices; Demographic-characteristics; Morbidity-rates; Mortality-rates; Age-factors; Age-groups; Lost-work-days; Author Keywords: Injury; Animal-related injury; Agricultural operation; Agricultural injuries; Epidemiology of injuries
Contact
Susan G. Gerberich PhD, Regional Injury Prevention Research Center, Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Mayo Mail Code 807, 420 Delaware St. SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455
CODEN
JSFRAV
Publication Date
20080901
Document Type
Journal Article
Email Address
gerbe001@umn.edu
Funding Amount
819887
Funding Type
Grant
Fiscal Year
2008
NTIS Accession No.
NTIS Price
Identifying No.
Grant-Number-R01-CCR-514375; Grant-Number-R01-OH-004270
Issue of Publication
4
ISSN
0022-4375
Priority Area
Work Environment and Workforce: Special Populations
Source Name
Journal of Safety Research
State
MN
Performing Organization
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
TOP