Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.

Detailed Search Results

Prevention of farm injuries in Denmark
Rasmussen K, Carstensen O, Lauritsen JM, Glasscock DJ, Hansen ON, Jensen UF
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health 2003 Aug;29(4):288-296
clinical trial
4/10 [Eligibility criteria: Yes; Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: No; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Blind assessors: No; Adequate follow-up: No; Intention-to-treat analysis: No; Between-group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates and variability: Yes. Note: Eligibility criteria item does not contribute to total score] *This score has been confirmed*

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effects of a 4-year randomized intervention program that combined a safety audit with safety behavior training in the prevention of farm injuries. METHODS: From a random sample of farms in the county of Ringkoebing, Denmark, 393 farms with 1597 residents and employees participated in a weekly self-registration of work-related accidents and injuries during 1 year. Worktasks and time at risk were recorded. A questionnaire including items on safety behavior was also mailed to each farm. Thereafter, the farms were randomly assigned to an intervention or control group. Two hundred and one farms with 990 persons at risk participated in the intervention study. The main outcome measures were the number and severity of accidents, safety behavior, and farmsite safety audits. RESULTS: Pre- and postmeasurements showed a substantial reduction in injury rates in the intervention group in comparison with a slight reduction in the control group. In a multivariate regression analysis the intervention effect was estimated to be a 30% injury-rate reduction of all injuries, while there was a 42% reduction for medically treated injuries only. Although none of these effects are statistically significant with the present sample size, their magnitude and direction support an intervention effect. The measures of safety behavior revealed significant improvements, and this finding supports the conclusion that the intervention effect was positive, since they concern some of the mediating factors on the pathway from intervention to improved injury rates. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention, which focused on safety behavior and was performed as a randomized controlled trial, was followed by a substantial reduction in the number of farm injuries. The reduction was particularly marked for the more severe injuries demanding medical treatment.

Full text (sometimes free) may be available at these link(s):      help