Time filter

Source Type

Hagel L.,University of Saskatchewan | King N.,Queens University | Dosman J.A.,University of Saskatchewan | Lawson J.,University of Saskatchewan | And 9 more authors.
Safety Science

Objectives: Our objectives were four fold: (1) to provide a contemporary update on the prevalence of hazards on farms; (2) to document the safety practices of farm owner-operators; (3) to measure investments in farm safety and (4) to assess their relationship with injury within a current regulatory environment. Methods: The study sample included 1218 farms that provided reports via a mailed questionnaire as part of a larger prospective cohort study. Participating farms were operated as individual family farms (56%), family corporations (26%), or formal partnerships (17%). Leading commodities produced included grain (88%) and beef or dairy cattle (42%). The median acreage was 1480 acres, with 28% operating more than 2500 acres. Analyses were descriptive and etiological and focused on the prevalence of hazards, investments in safety, safety practices and work habits, and how they related with farm injury. Results: Physical conditions on farms and associated farm operator attitudes and beliefs were often inconsistent with safe work practices. Investments in farm safety and also engagement in safe farm work practices were inversely related (. p<. 0.05) to the presence of hazards.After adjustment for confounding, these investments and practices were related to decreased risks for farm injury, but not serious farm injury. Conclusions: Reliance on safety standards that are mainly voluntary continues to put some farm people at risk for injury. Yet those that do comply with obvious and known safety measures are likely to have fewer exposures to physical hazards and unsafe work practices. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Discover hidden collaborations