BACKGROUND & SIGNIFICANCE RESULTS RESULTS (CONTINUED) MISCLASSIFICATION OF ANIMAL HANDLING INJURIES TO SWINE WORKERS Deirdre Green 1, Jessica Evanson 2, Jeff B. Bender 1,2, Bruce H. Alexander 1 1Division of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Minnesota 2 College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota BACKGROUND & SIGNIFICANCE RESULTS RESULTS (CONTINUED) Provide context with individual company info? Or combine all data? Indirect/direct – change language? (provide definitions) Change to pie chart or bar graph? Show indirect/direct for medical and indemnity Bullets: Sow farms most common injury location Most commonly injured body part = knees Indemnity/medical costs Animal agriculture ranks among one of the most hazardous industries in the United States (OSHA) Correctly identifying the cause of these injuries is essential for developing injury prevention protocols Injuries reported by swine production companies for regulatory and workers’ compensation purposes may be misclassified by specific cause Obtained 1,573 Reported Injuries 331 injuries were reported to be caused by animals An additional 104 injuries were identified after reviewing and recording data Source of Injury Original coding under-ascertained animals as the source of 114 (26%) injuries of 435 Animals were over-ascertained as the source of injury in 8 (2%) of 435 Costs Originally reported animal handling injuries total $729,393.23 With re-classification an additional $170,625.98 was added Table 1. Summary of Costs associated with Workers Compensation Claims Claims Cost* Total (N) Medical ($) Indemnity ($) Total ($) All Injuries 1788 1,394,769.87 3,179,603.09 4,574,372.96 AHI (Company Coded) 331 92,061.14 637,332.09 729,393.23 AHI (Coded by Researcher) 435 99,059.22 800,959.99 900,019.21 OBJECTIVES Figure 1. Originally coded causes of under-ascertained animal handling injuries Examine the occurrence of misclassifications of cause of injury to workers from animal handling injuries (AHI) Characterize the potential consequences of this misclassification on estimated injury burden CONCLUSIONS Misclassification of cause of injury may result in an underestimate of total injury burden from animal related injuries This could impair strategies to prioritize injury prevention strategies Development of a standardized system for capturing injury data in the swine industry may result in better characterization of swine related injuries METHODS Data from two large swine producing companies were obtained and injuries were enumerated from OSHA 300 logs and Worker Compensation claims The injury event narratives were reviewed to specifically identify animal involvement and re-coded based on the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System (OIICS) The original and re-coded injury source and event were compared by frequency and total cost. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The most common codes used in place of AHI’s were “Caught in/between” (26%) and “Struck by/against” (24%) This research was supported by NIOSH/CDC - U54 OH010170 National Pork Board Pork Checkoff CON000000052647 The Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center is funded by a cooperative agreement from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health - U54 OH010170 Upper Midwest Agricultural Safety and Health Center ~ umash.umn.edu A collaboration of the University of Minnesota School of Public Health and College of Veterinary Medicine, the National Farm Medicine Center of the Marshfield Clinic with the Migrant Clinicians Network, and the Minnesota Department of Health.