Injuries in the Iowa Certified Safe Farm Study

Rautiainen, Risto; Lange, Jeffrey L.; Hodne, Carol J.; Schneiders, Sara; Donham, Kelley J.

doi:10.13031/2013.15674

Cited by 68 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, McNamara and Reidy (1997) This is consistent with international findings (Solomon, 2002;McCurdy and Carroll, 2004;Rautiainen et al, 2004). …”

Section: Reasons For High Injury and Fatality Ratessupporting

confidence: 77%

Risk-taking and accidents on Irish farms: an analysis of the 2013 Health and Safety Authority survey

Watson¹,

Kenny²,

Maître³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For example, McNamara and Reidy (1997) This is consistent with international findings (Solomon, 2002;McCurdy and Carroll, 2004;Rautiainen et al, 2004). …”

Section: Reasons For High Injury and Fatality Ratessupporting

confidence: 77%

Risk-taking and accidents on Irish farms: an analysis of the 2013 Health and Safety Authority survey

Watson¹,

Kenny²,

Maître³

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…From the 132 articles, � could not be retrieved after an intensive search, 3 were reports concerning the same study, and 11� did not meet the inclusion criteria. Consequently we included 8 studies in the review [3 randomized controlled trials (8,15,16), 2 cluster randomized controlled trials (9,11), and 3 interrupted time-series studies (1�, 1�, 18)]. �fter a recheck of the missing titles, it did not appear that we missed any important studies.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of the aforementioned studies were from the United States (8,9,16) Two studies (8,9) examined injury prevention among children or adolescents. The rest dealt with injury prevention among adults, and one of these (11) had only male reindeer herders as its participants.…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two studies (15,16) combined three of the elements, one study (8) used two, and one (11) contained only one of the elements. Two studies had two intervention groups and a control group (9,11).…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…� meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials (11,15,16) aimed at reducing injuries among adults showed no evidence of an effect on injuries [rate ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.8�-1.20] (figure 1). The narrow 95% confidence interval indicated that a more positive or more negative outcome is not very likely for these kinds of educational interventions.…”

Section: Randomized Controlled Trialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of interventions in preventing injuries in agriculture—a systematic review and meta-analysis

Lehtola¹,

Rautiainen²,

Day³

et al. 2008

Scand J Work Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effectiveness of interventions in preventing injuriesObjectives This study reviewed the effectiveness of interventions in preventing occupational injuries among workers in agriculture.Methods Randomized controlled trials, controlled before-after studies, and interrupted time-series studies assessing interventions aimed at preventing injuries among workers in agriculture were considered. MEDLINE and five other databases were searched up to June 2006. Two authors independently assessed the eligibility of studies and the methodological quality of the ones included. Randomized controlled trials were combined in a meta-analysis. Interrupted time-series studies were reanalyzed to assess the immediate and progressive effect on injuries.Results Five randomized controlled trials and three interrupted time-series studies met the inclusion criteria.Six studies evaluated educational interventions and financial incentives, and two studies evaluated the effect of educational interventions and financial incentives, and two studies evaluated the effect of legislation. Three randomized controlled trials on educational interventions with �6�0 adult participants did Three randomized controlled trials on educational interventions with �6�0 adult participants did not indicate any injury-reducing effect, with a rate ratio of 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.8�-1.20), nor did two randomized controlled trials among children (6895 participants). Financial incentives decreased the injury level immediately after the intervention in one interrupted time-series study. Banning endosulfan pesticide in Sri Lanka led to a significant decrease in the trend of poisonings over time. Legislation requiring rollover protective structures on all tractors in Sweden did not produce a reduction in injuries, but the same requirement for new tractors was associated with a decrease in fatal injuries. ConclusionsThe reviewed studies provided no evidence that educational interventions are effective in decreasing injury rates among agricultural workers. Financial incentives may be a better means of reducing injury rates. Banning highly toxic pesticides may be effective. Legislation on safety devices on tractors yielded contradictory results.Key terms data pooling; evaluation research; intervention study; occupational accident; preventive measure, randomized controlled trial; systematic review. 1This review was adapted from the original Cochrane Review, entitled �Interventions for �reventing Injuries in the �g-entitled �Interventions for �reventing Injuries in the �g-entitled �Interventions for �reventing Injuries in the �g-ricultural Industry", by RH� Rautiainen, MM Lehtola, LM Day, E Schonstein, J Suutarinen, S Salminen, and J �erbeek, Rautiainen, MM Lehtola, LM Day, E Schonstein, J Suutarinen, S Salminen, and J �erbeek, published in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 1, �rt No: CD006398.

show abstract

Agriculture Hygiene

Donham

Nonnenmann

2021

Patty's Industrial Hygiene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter aims to address the information needs and to encourage the interests of industrial hygienists to apply their skills and knowledge to the population of workers employed in the industrial sectors of agriculture, forestry, and fishing (AFF). Worker health and safety efforts in these three sectors are often lumped together under the category of agricultural health and safety or AFF workers as defined by NIOSH. Other agricultural health and safety reviews have been aimed at health professionals or a more general industrial health and safety professional audience. Herein, we bring the essentials of this subject to an Industrial Hygiene audience, as compared to a general health and safety audience. In order to assist the reader, we organized the sections by the hygienist's paradigm – anticipation, recognition, evaluation, and control. We also discuss how the information provided might be applied to potential policies to stimulate industrial hygiene and safety activity in AFF sectors.

show abstract

Injuries in the Iowa Certified Safe Farm Study

Cited by 68 publications

References 16 publications

Risk-taking and accidents on Irish farms: an analysis of the 2013 Health and Safety Authority survey

Risk-taking and accidents on Irish farms: an analysis of the 2013 Health and Safety Authority survey

Effectiveness of interventions in preventing injuries in agriculture—a systematic review and meta-analysis

Agriculture Hygiene

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About