NONFATAL FARM INJURIES IN ONTARIO - A POPULATION-BASED SURVEY

Citation
W. Pickett et al., NONFATAL FARM INJURIES IN ONTARIO - A POPULATION-BASED SURVEY, Accident analysis and prevention, 27(4), 1995, pp. 425-433
Citations number
33
Categorie Soggetti
Public, Environmental & Occupation Heath",Transportation
ISSN journal
00014575
Volume
27
Issue
4
Year of publication
1995
Pages
425 - 433
Database
ISI
SICI code
0001-4575(1995)27:4<425:NFIIO->2.0.ZU;2-X
Abstract
A population-based mail survey of 2,000 farms was conducted to identif y rates and patterns of nonfatal agricultural injury in Ontario. Crude , age-adjusted, and stratum-specific rates of farm injury were calcula ted using data from the returned questionnaires. Patterns of farm inju ry and its treatment were described by person, place, and time. Respon se to the survey was 74% (1,364 of 1,842 farms representing 4,110 farm persons). The crude rate of farm injury was 5.8 per 100 persons per y ear (95% CI: 5.1, 6.5). Common mechanisms of injury included injuries related to the use of farm machinery, overexertion from lifting, accid ental falls, and injuries that occurred while working with farm animal s. High injury rates were observed in the male 31-40 age group (12.2 p er 100 persons per year). Spouses of farm owner-operators (1.7 per 100 persons per year) and their children (2.0 per 100 persons per year) r eported lower rates than expected. Most injured persons attributed no factor or ''carelessness'' as the principle cause of the injury event. Less than 10% of injuries were reported to the provincial workers' co mpensation board. We conclude that young adult male farmers have the h ighest rates of injury and warrant targeting by injury control program s. Data from workers' compensation boards have limited utility in the surveillance of most farm injuries in Ontario, in light of their low r ate of reporting. The frequency with which inattention or carelessness is attributed to the injury event (as opposed to environmental factor s, which might be changed) suggests that injury control programs must address this gap in understanding among farmers, who clearly are vulne rable to traumatic injury.