Premium
Agricultural injury
Author(s) -
McCurdy Stephen A.,
Carroll Daniel J.
Publication year - 2000
Publication title -
american journal of industrial medicine
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.7
H-Index - 104
eISSN - 1097-0274
pISSN - 0271-3586
DOI - 10.1002/1097-0274(200010)38:4<463::aid-ajim13>3.0.co;2-n
Subject(s) - medicine , occupational safety and health , agriculture , environmental health , injury prevention , occupational medicine , poison control , psychological intervention , suicide prevention , distrust , population , human factors and ergonomics , medline , risk assessment , occupational exposure , nursing , pathology , geography , computer security , archaeology , political science , computer science , law
Background Agriculture is one of the most hazardous industries in the US. Methods We reviewed MEDLINE and NIOSHTIC to identify English‐language studies addressing occupational injury among agricultural populations, focusing on North America. Additional references were identified from the reference lists of identified studies and from contacts with experts in the field. Results U.S. data indicate up to approximately 780 deaths and 140,000 cases of nonfatal disabling injuries in 1998. Risk of agricultural injuries is approximately 5‐10/100 persons per year, but is higher in certain risk groups, such as males and cattle workers. Falls, machinery, and animals are among the most common causes. Unique features of the agricultural workplace and exposed population combine to increase risk and hinder accurate measurement. These features include a wide range of activities, hazards, and dispersed work places in agriculture; a seasonal hired work force that often has brief tenure, poor English skills, and a distrust of officialdom; and a history of exemption regarding occupational health and safety regulations. Conclusions Research in agricultural injury should include epidemiologic study of risk factors and evaluation of interventions. Although only limited data are available documenting efficacy of specific preventive approaches, prevention should focus on engineering controls, regulatory approaches, and education. Am. J. Ind. Med. 38:463–480, 2000. © 2000 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.