Occupational Injury in America: An Analysis of Risk Factors Using Data From the General Social Survey (GSS)
Although much is known about the distribution of occupational injury in terms of various job and employment factors, considerably less is known about other possible risk factors, particularly those involving psychosocial and organizational factors. These factors have not been emphasized in most injury surveillance systems or large scale, population based surveys. In this study, data from the 2002 General Social Survey (GSS) and NIOSH Quality of Work Life (QWL) module were used to examine the risk of occupational injury in terms of socio-demographic factors, employment characteristics, and organizational factors. The most informative results were obtained from Poisson regression analyses, which identified race, occupational category, and work-family interference as risk factors, and safety climate and organizational effectiveness as protective factors for occupational injury. These results provide guidance for targeting interventions and protective measures to curtail occupational injury in the United States.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There are a variety of body aches that fall under the umbrella term of Musculoskeletal Discomforts (MSDs). These can be distinguished based on the level of pain suffered by the patient, ranging from mild and sporadic to serious, constant and fatal. It has been suggested that a link exists between MSDs and risk factors involving one’s occupational conditions and physicality. Examining the prevalence rate of musculoskeletal discomforts based on the severity among office workers was the main objective of this study. In order to achieve this objective, we had, in February 2015, selected from a population of 20 000 Malaysian office workers, 753 subjects within the age range of 20-50 years who have had a minimum of a year’s working experience. For this study, a form of structured questionnaire, known as the Cornell questionnaire, has been evaluated and put to use. Under the watch of the researchers, the subjects were instructed to complete the questionnaire in the morning before they begin their respective jobs. Based on their responses, the Cornell questionnaire has revealed that at least one case of severe pain in the neck, shoulder or lower back, respectively, is suffered by 69.7% of the subjects. In the case of neck-related aches, 15% low pain, whereas 51% involved mild pain and 33.9% were cases of severe pain. That being said, 19.3% low pain in the lower back, while 50.7% suffered from mild pain and 30% had severe pain in the same region. Percentages of 34.9% for high severity, 45.4% for mild severity and 19.7% for low severity were simultaneously reported in the shoulder section. In a nutshell, the study has revealed that, in comparison with body aches in the arms, knees, upper back, forearms, wrists, hands, hips and thighs, the subjects are more vulnerable to body aches in the neck, shoulders and lower back.0Comments 0Citations
- "That being said, MSDs can also lead to such external effects as raises in workers' fi nancial compensations, declines in work-related productivity and poor performances in job-related assignments [6, 7] . According to the American Bureau of Labor Statistics , a link to MSDs can be traced in nearly two-thirds of recently-recorded cases in the USA that involve various impediments in the workplace [8, 9]. On the other hand, there is much that has yet to be discovered for now, as the link that connects MSDs with workplace-related risk factors is still vague at best. "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objective To describe OH&S vulnerability across a diverse sample of Canadian workers.MethodsA survey was administered to 1,835 workers employed more than 15 hrs/week in workplaces with at least five employees. Adjusted logistic models were fitted for three specific and one overall measure of workplace vulnerability developed based on hazard exposure and access to protective OH&S policies and procedures, awareness of employment rights and responsibilities, and workplace empowerment.ResultsMore than one third of the sample experienced some OH&S vulnerability. The type and magnitude of vulnerability varied by labor market sub-group. Younger workers and those in smaller workplaces experienced significantly higher odds of multiple types of vulnerability. Temporary workers reported elevated odds of overall, awareness- and empowerment-related vulnerability, while respondents born outside of Canada had significantly higher odds of awareness vulnerability.Conclusion Knowing how labor market sub-groups experience different types of vulnerability can inform better-tailored primary prevention interventions. Am. J. Ind. Med. © 2015 The Authors. American Journal of Industrial Medicine Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.0Comments 0Citations
- "This overall vulnerability was significantly more prevalent among younger respondents , temporary employees , and those working in smaller workplaces . These results are consistent with previous research demonstrating elevated risk of both hazard exposure and occupational injury or illness among young workers and individuals in non - permanent employ - ment relationships [ Laberge and Ledoux , 2011 ; Smith and DeJoy , 2012 ; Dragano et al . , 2014 ] . "
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The goal of this study was to test the effectiveness of a workplace intervention targeting work-life stress and safety-related psychosocial risk factors on health and safety outcomes. Data were collected over time using a randomized control trial design with 264 construction workers employed in an urban municipal department. The intervention involved family- and safety-supportive supervisor behavior training (computer-based), followed by two weeks of behavior tracking and a four-hour, facilitated team effectiveness session including supervisors and employees. A significant positive intervention effect was found for an objective measure of blood pressure at the 12-month follow-up. However, no significant intervention results were found for self-reported general health, safety participation, or safety compliance. These findings suggest that an intervention focused on supervisor support training and a team effectiveness process for planning and problem solving should be further refined and utilized in order to improve employee health with additional research on the beneficial effects on worker safety.0Comments 0Citations
- "Safety outcomes are determined by more than workplace environmental and individual behavior factors. As research is beginning to show, psychosocial workplace factors such as work-life stress and conflict, as well as poor safety communication and climate, also affect safety outcomes [2, 6, 25, 26]. At least three critical meta-analyses have demonstrated the link between safety climate (shared employee perceptions of the safety environment at the organizational and group level, as well as individual perceptions of climate) and safety outcomes [11, 57, 58]. "