NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search
Regional Rural Injury Study-II: Innovative design and methods for surveillance of the burden of injury and relevant risk factors among agricultural household members.
Renier-CM; Gerberich-SG; Church-TR; Masten-AS; Ferguson Carlson-K; Mongin-SJ; Ryan-AD; Alexander-BH
APHA 133rd Annual Meeting and Exposition, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, December 10-14, 2005. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association, 2005 Dec; 114540
Background: This innovative model was designed to monitor changes, 1999 to 2001, in the incidence and consequences of injuries, for all ages, as well as risk factors for agriculture-related injuries incurred by children. Methods: Data collection was in two phases: Phase I, 1999; and Phase II (surveillance), 2001. A random sample of 16,000 agricultural operations was selected from the U.S. Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service Master ListFrame in five midwest states (3,200 from each). Using a computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI), operations were screened for eligibility. A non-respondent survey was mailed to operations that had not participated. To optimize recall, two CATI interviews, each covering a 6-month portion of the year, included demographic and injury questions, as well as exposure questions through a nested case/control study. Cases were <20 years old (<20) people, with agriculture-related injuries. Controls were randomly selected, based upon a 6:1 ratio and the known probability of a <20 person incurring an agriculture-related injury. Reliability interviews were conducted on randomly selected households and people -- 100 for each interview section. Medical record validation was conducted on a 1:1 sample of agriculture-injured and non-injured <20 people. Results: Phase I and II identified similar samples. Phase I: 4,402 eligible operations; Household members, 51.6% male; Injuries, 47.0% agriculture-related; Controls, 56.8% male, 33.8% age 0-9. Phase II: 4,408 eligible operations; Household members, 51.7% male; Injuries, 45.5% agriculture-related; Controls, 54.3% male, 33.1% age 0-9. Implications: This innovative model for assessment and surveillance provides opportunities for development of interventions and further research.
Age-factors; Age-groups; Agricultural-industry; Agricultural-workers; Agriculture; Case-studies; Children; Demographic-characteristics; Exposure-assessment; Families; Farmers; Injuries; Mathematical-models; Quantitative-analysis; Risk-analysis; Risk-factors; Statistical-analysis; Work-analysis; Work-capability; Work-environment; Worker-health; Work-operations; Work-organization; Work-performance; Workplace-monitoring; Workplace-studies; Author Keywords: Data/Surveillance; Injury Risk
Colleen M. Renier, BS, Division of Education & Research, St. Mary's/Duluth Clinic Health System, 5AV2ME, 400 E 3rd St, Duluth, MN 55805
APHA 133rd Annual Meeting and Exposition, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, December 10-14, 2005
MN; PA; CA
University of Minnesota Twin Cities