DeRoo L A, Rautiainen R H
Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
Am J Prev Med. 2000 May;18(4 Suppl):51-62. doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00141-0.
The main objective of this study was to systematically review the existing evidence for the effectiveness of farm injury prevention interventions.
We used a systematic approach to search the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, PsycInfo, Sociofile, NTIS, Agricola, Expanded Academic Index, Dissertation Abstracts, and Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSHTIC). Proceedings and technical papers of the National Institute for Farm Safety were reviewed. We also checked the references of potentially eligible studies and consulted with experts in the field to identify other relevant information sources.
Papers had to involve a farm safety intervention to be included in the review. To best characterize the current state of farm safety research, all study designs were accepted, including those without comparison groups and those with absent or inadequate evaluation methods.
We identified 25 studies for the review. Eleven of the studies involved farm safety education programs, five consisted of multifaceted interventions that included environmental revisions, a farm visit, or both; nine papers described farm safety interventions but did not report results from an evaluation. Farm safety education interventions included safety fairs, day camps; certification programs; workshops; and courses for farm families, youth, and agricultural workers. Multifaceted interventions were targeted to farm operators and generally involved farm safety audits, followed by environmental or equipment changes and/or safety education. Program evaluations assessed changes in safety attitudes, knowledge, and/or behaviors and generally involved pre- and post-test methodology. Only three studies examined changes in the incidence of farm injuries. Of the studies evaluated, most reported positive changes following the interventions. However, limitations in the design of evaluations make the results of many of the studies difficult to interpret.
There is a need for more rigorous evaluations of farm safety intervention programs. Suggested study design improvements include randomization of study subjects when appropriate, use of control groups and the objective measurement of outcomes such as behavior change and injury incidence.
本研究的主要目的是系统回顾关于农场伤害预防干预措施有效性的现有证据。
我们采用系统的方法检索了以下电子数据库:医学索引数据库(MEDLINE)、荷兰医学文摘数据库(EMBASE)、教育资源信息中心数据库(ERIC)、心理学文摘数据库(PsycInfo)、社会科学数据库(Sociofile)、美国国家技术信息服务处数据库(NTIS)、农业与生物科学数据库(Agricola)、扩展学术索引数据库、论文摘要数据库以及职业安全与健康数据库(NIOSHTIC)。我们查阅了美国国家农场安全研究所的会议记录和技术文件。我们还检查了潜在符合条件研究的参考文献,并咨询了该领域的专家以确定其他相关信息来源。
论文必须涉及农场安全干预措施才能纳入本综述。为了最好地描述农场安全研究的当前状况,所有研究设计均被接受,包括那些没有对照组以及评估方法缺失或不充分的研究。
我们确定了25项研究用于本综述。其中11项研究涉及农场安全教育项目,5项研究包括多方面干预措施,如环境改造、农场参观或两者皆有;9篇论文描述了农场安全干预措施,但未报告评估结果。农场安全教育干预措施包括安全集市、日间营地、认证项目、工作坊以及针对农场家庭、青少年和农业工人的课程。多方面干预措施针对农场经营者,通常包括农场安全审核,随后进行环境或设备改造和/或安全教育。项目评估评估了安全态度、知识和/或行为的变化,通常采用前后测试方法。只有三项研究考察了农场伤害发生率的变化。在评估的研究中,大多数报告了干预措施后的积极变化。然而,评估设计的局限性使得许多研究结果难以解释。
需要对农场安全干预项目进行更严格的评估。建议的研究设计改进包括在适当情况下对研究对象进行随机分组、使用对照组以及对行为改变和伤害发生率等结果进行客观测量。