Kelsey T W, May J J, Jenkins P L
Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Am J Ind Med. 1996 Oct;30(4):447-51. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199610)30:4<447::AID-AJIM10>3.0.CO;2-4.
Roll-over protective structures (ROPS) on farm tractors could significantly reduce the rate of fatal occupational injury on farms, but comparatively few tractors have them. Many of the policy discussions have focused on trying to identify the percentage of tractors that do not have ROPS, even though such a focus probably does not accurately represent effective protection by ROPS. This study investigates whether including differences in hours of usage, tractor activities, and seat belt use affects estimates of farm operators' protection by ROPS. In general, tractors used more hours a year were more likely to have ROPS. ROPS status also varied by tractor activity. When adjusting for seat belt use, effective ROPS protection is much less than when considering just ROPS status. Measures of the effective coverage of ROPS and policy responses should reflect these differences in hours, activities, and seat belt use.
农用拖拉机上的翻车保护结构（ROPS）可显著降低农场致命职业伤害的发生率，但配备这种结构的拖拉机相对较少。许多政策讨论都集中在试图确定未安装ROPS的拖拉机的比例，尽管这样的关注点可能无法准确反映ROPS的有效保护情况。本研究调查了纳入使用时长、拖拉机作业活动以及安全带使用方面的差异，是否会影响对ROPS对农场经营者保护效果的评估。一般来说，每年使用时长更多的拖拉机更有可能配备ROPS。ROPS的配备情况也因拖拉机作业活动而异。在考虑安全带使用情况进行调整后，ROPS的有效保护程度远低于仅考虑ROPS配备情况时。对ROPS有效覆盖范围的衡量以及政策应对措施应反映出在使用时长、作业活动和安全带使用方面的这些差异。
