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
. 2025 Mar 15;69(3):233-250.
doi: 10.1093/annweh/wxae105.

Deconstruction of farm machine-related safety interventions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Aswathi Surendran  1 , Jennifer McSharry  1 , Rossella Di Domenico  1 , David Meredith  2 , Oonagh Meade  1 , Sandra Malone  3 , Denis O'Hora  1
Affiliations

Deconstruction of farm machine-related safety interventions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

Aswathi Surendran et al. Ann Work Expo Health. .

Abstract

Introduction: Agricultural workplaces have a high number of incidents and fatalities, with the majority occurring from machinery use. Farmers' behaviour plays a critical role in maintaining safety, as improper or unsafe practices often lead to injuries and fatalities. This review categorises interventions targeting farm machine safety, examining both the behaviour change techniques (BCTs) used and their reported outcomes to understand how the techniques influence safety practices and outcomes on farms.

Methods: The systematic review is reported in accordance with the Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Seven electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published before June 2024, and the quality of included studies was assessed using Cochrane risk of bias assessment tools. Analysis of intervention behavioural components was guided by the behaviour change wheel framework and BCT taxonomy (v1). The findings were synthesised using a narrative review.

Results: Nine studies were included and a total of 21 BCTs were identified. The most frequently coded BCTs were 4.1 (instruction on how to perform the behaviour), 10.8 (incentive [outcome]), and 16.3 (vicarious consequences) (each n = 6). Reported outcomes included reductions in injury rates, improved adoption of safety devices, implementation of safety measures, and positive shifts in safety norms and perceptions. However, due to variations in intervention design and reporting, assessing the direct impact of specific BCTs on these outcomes proved challenging.

Discussion: The use of BCT taxonomy provided a common language for describing intervention components and enabled the standardisation of intervention content analysis. While patterns were observed regarding the commonly used BCTs, their implementation and outcomes, the heterogeneity and limited details provided by studies limited our ability to discern their effectiveness. Providing (i) greater transparency in reporting active intervention components and (ii) clearer connections between components and specific outcomes, will enable enhanced comparisons of future studies, and facilitate a greater understanding of how to support safe machine-related behaviours on farms.

Keywords: BCT; behaviour change interventions; farm injuries; farm safety; occupational safety; tractor rollover; tractor safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None decclared.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
The BCW framework (Michie et al. 2011).
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
PRISMA flowchart of study selection process.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Frequency of the BCTs used in the included intervention studies (n = 9).
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Frequency of each BCT against intervention sub-categories.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Andarge T, Lichtenberg E.. 2020. Regulatory compliance under enforcement gaps. J Regul Econ. 57(3):181–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11149-020-09405-0 - DOI
    1. Angioloni S, Jack C.. 2022. Farm fatalities in Northern Ireland agriculture: what fifty years of data tell us. Econ Hum Biol. 46:101122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehb.2022.101122 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bunker A, Bärnighausen T, Woodward A, Bullen C. 2020. Housing structure and occupant behaviour to increase the environmental and health co-benefits of housing: Insights from expert interviews in New Zealand. Indoor and Built Environment 30(4):535–553. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326X19897965. - DOI
    1. Burrow AJ. 2017. A look at behavior-based safety program effectiveness: a qualitative study of participants’ perceptions of safety program effectiveness in a Bayer CropScience’s Cottonseed Delinting Plant (Doctoral dissertation). Texas Tech University.
    1. Byard RW. 2017. Farming deaths – an ongoing problem. Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology 13(1):1–3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-017-9839-8. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources