A case-crossover study of laceration injuries in pork processing

Lina Lander, Gary Sorock, Terry L Stentz, Lynette M Smith, Murray Mittleman, Melissa J. Perry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The authors estimated the associations between transient risk factors and laceration injuries in workers at two meatpacking plants in the Midwest. Methods: The case-crossover design was used to collect within-subject transient work task and personal-level exposure information. RRs of laceration injuries were estimated by comparing exposures during the 'hazard' period (just before the laceration injury) with exposures in the 'control' period (the previous workweek). Stratified analyses were utilised to estimate the effects of gender, ethnicity, training and the number of adjacent coworkers on each transient risk factor. Results: The authors interviewed 295 meatpacking workers with laceration injuries (mean age 36.6 years, SD 11.2, 75% men, 48% Hispanic). Recent tool sharpening (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.8 to 7.4) and equipment malfunction (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.9 to 7.3) were associated with the highest RR for laceration injury, followed by using an unusual work method to accomplish a task (RR 4.1, 95% CI 2.6 to 6.4) and performing an unusual task (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.0). Rushing and being distracted were not significantly associated with an elevated RR of a laceration injury. In stratified analyses, there were a number of significant differences in laceration risk factors by gender, ethnicity, training, and number of workers on the line. Conclusions: Sharpening tools, equipment malfunction, using an unusual work method to accomplish a task and performing an unusual task were all associated with increased risk of lacerations. Expanded training in atypical work circumstances and evaluation of tool sharpening procedures are intervention areas in meatpacking that need examination.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)410-416
Number of pages7
JournalOccupational and Environmental Medicine
Volume69
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2012

Fingerprint

Lacerations
Cross-Over Studies
Wounds and Injuries
Equipment Failure
Red Meat
Hispanic Americans

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

A case-crossover study of laceration injuries in pork processing. / Lander, Lina; Sorock, Gary; Stentz, Terry L; Smith, Lynette M; Mittleman, Murray; Perry, Melissa J.

In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 69, No. 6, 01.06.2012, p. 410-416.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lander, Lina ; Sorock, Gary ; Stentz, Terry L ; Smith, Lynette M ; Mittleman, Murray ; Perry, Melissa J. / A case-crossover study of laceration injuries in pork processing. In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2012 ; Vol. 69, No. 6. pp. 410-416.
@article{0465fc56c1cf4ff4ae6fde774d9f83f5,
title = "A case-crossover study of laceration injuries in pork processing",
abstract = "Objectives: The authors estimated the associations between transient risk factors and laceration injuries in workers at two meatpacking plants in the Midwest. Methods: The case-crossover design was used to collect within-subject transient work task and personal-level exposure information. RRs of laceration injuries were estimated by comparing exposures during the 'hazard' period (just before the laceration injury) with exposures in the 'control' period (the previous workweek). Stratified analyses were utilised to estimate the effects of gender, ethnicity, training and the number of adjacent coworkers on each transient risk factor. Results: The authors interviewed 295 meatpacking workers with laceration injuries (mean age 36.6 years, SD 11.2, 75{\%} men, 48{\%} Hispanic). Recent tool sharpening (RR 5.3, 95{\%} CI 3.8 to 7.4) and equipment malfunction (RR 5.3, 95{\%} CI 3.9 to 7.3) were associated with the highest RR for laceration injury, followed by using an unusual work method to accomplish a task (RR 4.1, 95{\%} CI 2.6 to 6.4) and performing an unusual task (RR 2.3, 95{\%} CI 1.8 to 3.0). Rushing and being distracted were not significantly associated with an elevated RR of a laceration injury. In stratified analyses, there were a number of significant differences in laceration risk factors by gender, ethnicity, training, and number of workers on the line. Conclusions: Sharpening tools, equipment malfunction, using an unusual work method to accomplish a task and performing an unusual task were all associated with increased risk of lacerations. Expanded training in atypical work circumstances and evaluation of tool sharpening procedures are intervention areas in meatpacking that need examination.",
author = "Lina Lander and Gary Sorock and Stentz, {Terry L} and Smith, {Lynette M} and Murray Mittleman and Perry, {Melissa J.}",
year = "2012",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1136/oemed-2011-100339",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "69",
pages = "410--416",
journal = "Occupational and Environmental Medicine",
issn = "1351-0711",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A case-crossover study of laceration injuries in pork processing

AU - Lander, Lina

AU - Sorock, Gary

AU - Stentz, Terry L

AU - Smith, Lynette M

AU - Mittleman, Murray

AU - Perry, Melissa J.

PY - 2012/6/1

Y1 - 2012/6/1

N2 - Objectives: The authors estimated the associations between transient risk factors and laceration injuries in workers at two meatpacking plants in the Midwest. Methods: The case-crossover design was used to collect within-subject transient work task and personal-level exposure information. RRs of laceration injuries were estimated by comparing exposures during the 'hazard' period (just before the laceration injury) with exposures in the 'control' period (the previous workweek). Stratified analyses were utilised to estimate the effects of gender, ethnicity, training and the number of adjacent coworkers on each transient risk factor. Results: The authors interviewed 295 meatpacking workers with laceration injuries (mean age 36.6 years, SD 11.2, 75% men, 48% Hispanic). Recent tool sharpening (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.8 to 7.4) and equipment malfunction (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.9 to 7.3) were associated with the highest RR for laceration injury, followed by using an unusual work method to accomplish a task (RR 4.1, 95% CI 2.6 to 6.4) and performing an unusual task (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.0). Rushing and being distracted were not significantly associated with an elevated RR of a laceration injury. In stratified analyses, there were a number of significant differences in laceration risk factors by gender, ethnicity, training, and number of workers on the line. Conclusions: Sharpening tools, equipment malfunction, using an unusual work method to accomplish a task and performing an unusual task were all associated with increased risk of lacerations. Expanded training in atypical work circumstances and evaluation of tool sharpening procedures are intervention areas in meatpacking that need examination.

AB - Objectives: The authors estimated the associations between transient risk factors and laceration injuries in workers at two meatpacking plants in the Midwest. Methods: The case-crossover design was used to collect within-subject transient work task and personal-level exposure information. RRs of laceration injuries were estimated by comparing exposures during the 'hazard' period (just before the laceration injury) with exposures in the 'control' period (the previous workweek). Stratified analyses were utilised to estimate the effects of gender, ethnicity, training and the number of adjacent coworkers on each transient risk factor. Results: The authors interviewed 295 meatpacking workers with laceration injuries (mean age 36.6 years, SD 11.2, 75% men, 48% Hispanic). Recent tool sharpening (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.8 to 7.4) and equipment malfunction (RR 5.3, 95% CI 3.9 to 7.3) were associated with the highest RR for laceration injury, followed by using an unusual work method to accomplish a task (RR 4.1, 95% CI 2.6 to 6.4) and performing an unusual task (RR 2.3, 95% CI 1.8 to 3.0). Rushing and being distracted were not significantly associated with an elevated RR of a laceration injury. In stratified analyses, there were a number of significant differences in laceration risk factors by gender, ethnicity, training, and number of workers on the line. Conclusions: Sharpening tools, equipment malfunction, using an unusual work method to accomplish a task and performing an unusual task were all associated with increased risk of lacerations. Expanded training in atypical work circumstances and evaluation of tool sharpening procedures are intervention areas in meatpacking that need examination.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861201430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861201430&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/oemed-2011-100339

DO - 10.1136/oemed-2011-100339

M3 - Article

VL - 69

SP - 410

EP - 416

JO - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

JF - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

SN - 1351-0711

IS - 6

ER -