MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/occmed/kqj016

Медицинская библиотека · Occupational medicine (Oxford, England) · 2006

Determinants of accident proneness: a case-control study in railway workers.

Gauchard G C, Mur J M, Touron C, Benamghar L, Dehaene D, Perrin P, Chau N

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Accident proneness or workers who have more frequent occupational injuries is common but the role of occupational and individual factors has rarely been studied.

AIM: To assess the relationships of certain occupational and individual characteristics with frequency of occupational injuries.

METHOD: This case-control study included 1305 male workers with occupational injuries during 1999-2000 and 1305 controls from a railway company. A standardized questionnaire was completed by the occupational physician in the presence of the subject. The data were analysed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Having more than one injury was associated with short service in the present job, younger age, sleep disorders, smoking, requesting a job change, physical disability and lack of physical activity. Safety training was negatively related to injury frequency. Short service in the present job was the only significant factor for single injuries.

CONCLUSION

This study identified a number of work and individual factors that predicted occupational injury frequency and may be useful in designing preventative measures. Occupational physicians could assist workers to be more aware of the risks and to find remedial measures.

Для цитирования: Gauchard G C, Mur J M, Touron C, Benamghar L, Dehaene D, Perrin P, Chau N. Determinants of accident proneness: a case-control study in railway workers.. Occupational medicine (Oxford, England). 2006. DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqj016.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.