Stress on the farm and its association with injury

• Published in: Journal of agricultural safety and health Vol. 10; no. 3; pp. 141 - 154
• Main Authors: Simpson, K, Sebastian, R, Arbuckle, T.E, Bancej, C, Pickett, W
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.08.2004
• Subjects: Accidents, Occupational - psychology; Accidents, Occupational - statistics & numerical data; Adult; Age Factors; agricultural health and safety; Agriculture; Cohort Studies; Confidence Intervals; Cross-Sectional Studies; farm families; farm injuries; Female; gender differences; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Occupational Health; Odds Ratio; Ontario - epidemiology; Ontario Farm Family Health Study; psychological stress; Risk Factors; Sex Factors; Stress, Psychological - complications; Stress, Psychological - epidemiology; Workload; Wounds and Injuries - epidemiology; Wounds and Injuries - etiology; Wounds and Injuries - psychology; Ontario
• ISSN: 1074-7583; 1943-7846
• DOI: 10.13031/2013.16471

The objectives of this study were to examine associations between perceived psychosocial stress and farm injury among men and women in Ontario, Canada. Cross-sectional data from the Ontario Farm Family Health Study were used to investigate perceived levels of stress, farm injuries and their interrelationships. Age-standardized rates of injury were 13.3/100/year and 3.8/100/year for men and women, respectively. The most common types of injury were strains/sprains/torn ligaments and cuts/lacerations. Approximately 18% of men and 11% of women reported that their lives were "very stressful." Common sources of stress were money worries and feeling overworked. The risk for farm injury increased with level of stress. For men, the adjusted odds ratios for injury were: 1.00 (referent), 1.02 (95% CI: 0.72, 1.42), and 1.61 (95% CI: 1.08, 2.41)for lowest to highest stress levels, respectively. For women, adjusted odds ratios were: 1.00 (referent), 1.43 (95% CI: 0.83, 2.47), and 2.73 (95% CI: 1.38, 5.39). These risks were especially pronounced among women who were not employed off the farm. This study represents a novel quantitative analysis examining associations between perceived psychological stress and farm injury. Future research should investigate these associations in other farm populations, confirm their temporal directions, and further explore the effect of gender on the strength of these associations.