Suchergebnisse

peer-reviewed ; 32nd Triennial Congress of the International Commission on Occupational Health (ICOH), Dublin, Ireland, 29th April to 4th May 2018 ; Introduction Farming is an occupation that incurs high rates of occupational injuries and illness, including fatalities. Internationally, legislative approaches to improve agricultural occupational safety and health (OSH) practices have been inconsistent in achieving those objectives. Many alternative initiatives to influence agricultural OSH practices have been developed, frequently emphasising information provision. In Ireland, evaluation of information provision approaches, such as classroom-based learning, has found that this is ineffective for improving agricultural OSH practices. However, peer-based learning using communities of practice (COPs), such as Teagasc dairy farmer discussion groups, presents a promising context for agricultural OSH promotion in Ireland. Research has established the efficacy of farmer discussion groups for promoting adoption of novel technologies and production practices. Little research has been undertaken to assess whether they are effective for promoting agricultural OSH practices. This paper describes the extent to which Teagasc dairy discussion groups engage with agricultural OSH, and identifies the characteristics associated with agricultural OSH engagement. The results are evaluated with respect to the existing literature regarding effective social learning for farming and OSH promotion, to assess the suitability of these COPs for agricultural OSH promotion. Methods Information about discussion group characteristics and engagement with OSH topics was collected using a survey of Teagasc dairy discussion group members, and a survey of Teagasc dairy discussion group facilitators. The statistical software R was used to assess variation in discussion group engagement with OSH, and the group characteristics statistically associated with that variation. Result Analysis of the results is ongoing and will be completed in September 2017. Discussion The findings of this study, including the evaluation framework developed from literature review, can contribute to effective agricultural OSH promotion in Ireland, and internationally. This is especially true for other countries with existing farmer COPs, such as farmer discussion groups in New Zealand and Wales.

Article ; The agriculture sector is one of the most hazardous occupations worldwide. The EU farming population is predominantly self-employed, who are largely outside the scope of EU occupational safety and health (OSH) legislation. Utilising effective communications approaches to transmit clear messages is a possible way of motivating farmer OSH adoption. The Public Health Model (PHM) of accident causation conceptualises an accident as occurring due to multiple interacting physical and human factors while the Social-Ecologic Framework enhances the PHM by defining various levels of the social environment which are influential on persons' OSH actions. A knowledge gap exists in how farmers conceptualise accident causation. The aim of this study is to report findings of a Score Card exercise conducted among Irish farmers (n = 1,151) to reveal knowledge on farmers' conceptualisation of accident causation where farmers ranked in order of importance up to five causes of farm accidents. First ranked items related to 'machinery/ vehicles', 'organisational' and 'livestock' as accident causation factors (92%). Overall rankings for up to five ranked causes identified six causes: 'machinery/ vehicles', 'organisational', 'livestock', 'slurry related', 'trips, falls, buildings-related' and 'electrical' (96.5%). The study data indicated that farmers' perceptions of accident causes were inaccurate when compared with objective fatal farm accident data. The study concluded that communicating accurate and contemporary OSH messages to farmers has potential to assist with farm accident prevention. Based on the multiple and interacting risk factors arising in agriculture it is suggested that more elaborate study of farm accident prevention is warranted.

peer-reviewed ; The agriculture sector is one of the most hazardous occupations worldwide. The EU farming population is predominantly self-employed, who are largely outside the scope of EU occupational safety and health (OSH) legislation. Utilising effective communications approaches to transmit clear messages is a possible way of motivating farmer OSH adoption. The Public Health Model (PHM) of accident causation conceptualises an accident as occurring due to multiple interacting physical and human factors while the Social-Ecologic Framework enhances the PHM by defining various levels of the social environment which are influential on persons' OSH actions. A knowledge gap exists in how farmers conceptualise accident causation. The aim of this study is to report findings of a Score Card exercise conducted among Irish farmers (n = 1,151) to reveal knowledge on farmers' conceptualisation of accident causation where farmers ranked in order of importance up to five causes of farm accidents. First ranked items related to 'machinery/ vehicles', 'organisational' and 'livestock' as accident causation factors (92%). Overall rankings for up to five ranked causes identified six causes: 'machinery/ vehicles', 'organisational', 'livestock', 'slurry related', 'trips, falls, buildings-related' and 'electrical' (96.5%). The study data indicated that farmers' perceptions of accident causes were inaccurate when compared with objective fatal farm accident data. The study concluded that communicating accurate and contemporary OSH messages to farmers has potential to assist with farm accident prevention. Based on the multiple and interacting risk factors arising in agriculture it is suggested that more elaborate study of farm accident prevention is warranted.

A quasi-experimental design using multiple levels of measurement was used to evaluate the effectiveness of a U.S. General Accounting Office communications training program. Results from a multivariate analysis of variance indicated that employees who underwent training reported more positive attitudes about communication skills and performed better on knowledge and recognition assessments than did control groups in the study. With the exception of employees' ability to apply knowledge of communication skills to simulated written problems, the relative amount of change on the measures was not very large. The course and its instructor were rated very favorable by the partici pants, though certain aspects of the course-such as the evaluation, written exercises, and booklets and handouts-were more negatively valued by course participants. The results from this project are comparable to those obtained elsewhere, though the direct benefit of such changes to the organization are less clear.