Analyses of longitudinal insurance data contributes to better understanding of the long-term risk of occupational injury and disease among farmers. We suggest focusing on recurrent health outcomes and their causes among high risk populations could help design more effective interventions in agriculture and other industries.
The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the incidence of and risk factors for compensated occupational injuries and diseases in agriculture. The study population consisted of 78,679 Finnish farmers, spouses, and salaried family members covered by mandatory workers' compensation insurance. This population had a total of 24,424 occupational injuries and 1684 diseases from 2000 to 2004. In the 5-year period, 20.2% of the population had (one or more) injuries and 2.0% had occupational diseases. Multiple claims were common particularly among livestock producers. Using Poisson regression analyses, we identified several personal and farm-related risk factors, with relative risk estimates ranging from 1.07 to 3.08 for injuries and from 1.45 to 3.01 for diseases. Cattle-intensive geographic regions, occupational health service membership, large farm size, and farming alone were identified as risk factors for both outcomes. Further, male gender, higher number of insurance years, and residing on the farm were among risk factors for injury. These risk factors identified from a large longitudinal data set can be considered for developing and targeting interventions for farmers at highest risk of occupational injury and disease.
IntroductionConventional pipeline and parlor milking expose dairy farmers and workers to adverse health outcomes. In recent years, automatic milking systems (AMS) have gained much popularity in Finland, but the changes in working conditions when changing to AMS are not well known. The aim of this study was to investigate the occupational health and safety risks in using AMS, compared to conventional milking systems (CMS).MethodsAn anonymous online survey was sent to each Finnish dairy farm with an AMS in 2014. Only those dairy farmers with prior work experience in CMS were included in the final analysis consisting of frequency distributions and descriptive statistics.ResultsWe received 228 usable responses (131 male and 97 female; 25.2% response rate). The majority of the participants found that AMS had brought flexibility to the organization of farm work, and it had increased leisure time, quality of life, productivity of dairy work, and the attractiveness of dairy farming among the younger generation. In addition, AMS reduced the perceived physical strain on the musculoskeletal system as well as the risk of occupational injuries and diseases, compared to CMS. However, working in close proximity to the cattle, particularly training of heifers to use the AMS, was regarded as a high-risk work task. In addition, the daily cleaning of the AMS and manual handling of rejected milk were regarded as physically demanding. The majority of the participants stated that mental stress caused by the monotonous, repetitive, paced, and hurried work had declined after changing to AMS. However, many indicated increased mental stress because of the demanding management of the AMS. Nightly alarms caused by the AMS, lack of adequately skilled hired labor or farm relief workers, and the 24/7 standby for the AMS were issues that also caused mental stress.ConclusionBased on this study, AMS may have significant potential in the prevention of adverse health outcomes in milking of dairy cows. In addition, AMS may improve the productivity of dairy work and sustainability of dairy production. However, certain characteristics of the AMS require further attention with regard to occupational health and safety risks.
This pilot study investigated how farm operators use and experience working with advanced farm technology and automated systems. The study participants included 10 farm operators at 4 modern and technically well-equipped arable and dairy farms. The informants reported that the technology allowed for more accuracy and efficiency in daily work, made the work less physically strenuous, and gave more time for leisure. The challenges lay in systems and programs not being compatible and difficulties in interpreting generated data. At times, the technology was considered complex or difficult to handle and operate. It was also considered mentally stressful when it did not work as expected. Nightly alarms causing disturbed sleep and work time, and tasks losing some of their clear and natural starts and ends were the most challenging issues on dairy farms. Malfunctions disturbed the daily work, especially when spare parts or service technicians were unavailable. The informants concluded that advanced farm technology and automated systems had both positive and negative sides. They reported no consistent mental strain caused by the technology and considered it a necessity for their future work. However, technology and automated systems must be functional, user-friendly, and reliable to avoid imposing potential mental strain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.