Surveillance research methods in construction injury.
Glazner-J; Bondy-J; Lipscomb-H; Lezotte-D
Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Grant Number R01-OH-007633, 2006 Dec; :1-73
Problem: To identify and examine several approaches to injury surveillance on a commercial construction site. Approach: A prospective study of the hazards and injuries associated with construction on a large commercial construction project - a two-building biomedical research complex - was designed to examine aspects of the epidemiology of construction injury and to develop and evaluate new methods for acquiring information about exposures and factors contributing to construction injury. Safety professionals prospectively interviewed all consenting injured workers using a worker interview form developed for the study. The form included free text descriptions of the injury circumstances, standard questions asked about all injuries and specific questions developed for the most common types of injuries among workers. Ninety percent of workers injured during our time on site were interviewed. Once the interview was completed, the safety professional who conducted the interview circled all factors shown in an adapted version of Haddon's Matrix that contributed to the injury. The factors so identified were compared with factors identified from the free text description by a trained layperson and with factors identified by the layperson based on injury descriptions from Workers' Compensation claims. Two types of site assessments were used to collect information about hazards on this site. First, the owner mandated a periodic full site walk by a representative of the safety staff in order to identify, ameliorate, and track hazards. In addition, as part of the research project, we developed a task-specific hazard identification procedure to identify hazards associated with particular tasks, note the degree of protection afforded to the workers, and make comments. A total of 105 walk throughs and 49 task-based walk-throughs were performed, approximately two per week. To understand best safety practices, eight focus groups were held with a total of 62 participants, and key informant interviews were conducted with nineteen people representing a variety of roles in the overall project. These data were analyzed using QSR N5(6), a qualitative analysis program, to identify issues and themes related to elements of the safety program, employee group, and exposures.
Accident-analysis; Accident-potential; Accident-prevention; Accident-rates; Accidents; Accident-statistics; Construction; Construction-industry; Construction-workers; Demographic-characteristics; Epidemiology; Injuries; Injury-prevention; Protective-measures; Qualitative-analysis; Risk-analysis; Safety-education; Safety-measures; Safety-personnel; Safety-practices; Safety-programs; Safety-research; Statistical-analysis; Statistical-quality-control; Work-analysis; Work-environment; Worker-health; Worker-motivation; Work-operations; Work-performance; Workplace-monitoring; Workplace-studies; Work-practices
Judith Glazner, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center Department of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics 4200 E. Ninth Ave. Denver, CO 80262
Final Grant Report
NTIS Accession No.
Disease and Injury: Traumatic Injuries
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
University of Colorado, Denver