Abstract
Introduction
Most previous studies about missed reporting of nonfatal occupational injuries have four limitations: (i) mostly qualitative methods, (ii) arbitrary fraction used to estimate missed nonfatal occupational injuries based on subjective opinions, (iii) use of datasets derived from only one country, and (iv) use of a relatively simple estimation method. In contrast, (i) using quantitative approaches, this study will calculate the (ii) objective estimates on (iii) a multinational scale. (iv) A newly devised logical approach for estimation will be applied. Through this study, the fraction of missed reports of nonfatal occupational injuries will be estimated in a new way.
Methods
Four International Labor Organization (ILO) datasets were analyzed in this study: (i) fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 workers by sex and migrant status, (ii) nonfatal occupational injuries per 100,000 workers by sex and migrant status, (iii) inspectors per 10,000 employed persons, and (iv) labor inspection visits per inspector. The ratification status of 27 ILO conventions, classified into 12 categories, was used for the analyses. The GDP dataset from the World Bank Open Data was also used. In addition to basic descriptive analyses, a multilevel Poisson regression method was applied. The primary outcome was the risk ratio of the above-mentioned four selected measures when an ILO convention was ratified compared to when the convention was not ratified. Finally, for the estimation of the fraction of missed reports of nonfatal occupational injuries, a newly devised estimation method was applied. This method was devised based on a unique characteristic of reporting systems for fatal occupational injuries (duplicate reporting through multiple reporting systems).
Results
The ratio of discovered nonfatal occupational injuries to total estimated nonfatal occupational injuries ranged from 0.13 (95% CI 0.13–0.14) to 0.89 (95% CI 0.84–0.95). In other words, the minimum estimate of the percentage of missed injury reports is 11% (1–0.89 = 0.11) and the maximum is 87% (1–0.13 = 0.87). The mean value of the ratios of discovered nonfatal occupational injuries to total estimated nonfatal occupational injuries was 0.52. In other words, the most likely estimate for the fraction of missed injury reports is 48% (1–0.52 = 0.48).
Discussion
Underreporting of nonfatal occupational injuries could hinder the efforts of governments to address and improve the occupational safety and health status of the country. Accurate assessment of the current status of nonfatal occupational injuries is important for devising effective strategies to reduce this type of injury.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials
The datasets analyzed during the current study are available on the International Labor Organization (ILO) Department of Statistics homepage (https://ilostat.ilo.org/data/).
References
Committee on Diagnostic Error in Health Care, Board on Health Care Services, Institute of Medicine, The National Academies of Sciences Engineering, and Medicine, Balogh EP, Miller BT, Ball JR (2015) Improving diagnosis in health care. National Academies Press, Washington
Barth A, Winker R, Ponocny-Seliger E, Sögner L (2007) Economic growth and the incidence of occupational injuries in Austria. Wien Klin Wochenschr 119(5):158–163
Boden LI, Ozonoff A (2008) Capture-recapture estimates of nonfatal workplace Injuries and Illnesses. Ann Epidemiol 18(6):500–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2007.11.003
Castañeda H, Holmes SM, Madrigal DS, Young M-ED, Beyeler N, Quesada J (2015) Immigration as a social determinant of health. Annu Rev Public health 36:375–392
LaDou J, Harrison R (2007) Current occupational & environmental medicine. McGraw-Hill, New York
Leary VA (2013) International labour conventions and national law: the effectiveness of the automatic incorporation of treaties in national legal systems. Springer
Leigh JP, Marcin JP, Miller TR (2004) An estimate of the US government’s undercount of nonfatal occupational injuries. J Occup Environ Med 46(1):10–18
Leigh JP, Du J, McCurdy SA (2014) An estimate of the U S government’s undercount of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in agriculture. Ann Epidemiol 24(4):254–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2014.01.006
Lowry SJ et al (2010) Possibilities and challenges in occupational injury surveillance of day laborers. Am J Ind Med 53(2):126–134. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.20741
Orellana C et al (2021) Organisational factors and under-reporting of occupational injuries in Sweden: a population-based study using capture–recapture methodology. Occup Environ Med. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2020-107257
Probst TM, Estrada AX (2010) Accident under-reporting among employees: testing the moderating influence of psychological safety climate and supervisor enforcement of safety practices. Accid Anal Prev 42(5):1438–1444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.06.027
Probst TM, Bettac EL, Austin CT (2019) Accident under-reporting in the workplace Increasing Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces. Edward Elgar Publishing, New York
Rappin CL, Wuellner SE, Bonauto DK (2016) Employer reasons for failing to report eligible workers’ compensation claims in the BLS survey of occupational injuries and illnesses. Am J Ind Med 59(5):343–356. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22582
Rosenman KD, Kalush A, Reilly MJ, Gardiner JC, Reeves M, Luo Z (2006) How much work-related injury and illness is missed by the current national surveillance system? J Occup Environ Med 48(4):357–365
Taylor Moore J, Cigularov KP, Sampson JM, Rosecrance JC, Chen PY (2013) Construction workers’ reasons for not reporting work-related Injuries: an exploratory study. Int J Occup Saf Ergonom 19(1):97–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2013.11076969
Vives A et al (2013) Employment precariousness and poor mental health: evidence from Spain on a new social determinant of health. J Environ Public Health. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/978656
Webb G, Redman S, Wilkinson C, Sanson-Fisher R (1989) Filtering effects in reporting work injuries∗. Accid Anal Prev 21(2):115–123
Wiatrowski WJ (2014) Examining the completeness of occupational injury and illness data: an update on current research. Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. https://doi.org/10.21916/mlr.2014.24
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Jinyoung Moon: conceptualization, methodology, software, investigation, resources, data curation, validation, formal analysis, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualization, supervision, project administration.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moon, J. Missed reporting of nonfatal occupational injuries: estimation using the International Labor Organization datasets. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 95, 1343–1356 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-022-01892-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-022-01892-2