Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 May;18(4 Suppl):51-62.
doi: 10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00141-0.

A systematic review of farm safety interventions

Affiliations

A systematic review of farm safety interventions

L A DeRoo et al. Am J Prev Med. 2000 May.

Abstract

Objective: The main objective of this study was to systematically review the existing evidence for the effectiveness of farm injury prevention interventions.

Search strategy: 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.

Selection criteria: 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.

Results: 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.

Conclusions: 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.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources