Geographic Variation in Work Injuries: a Multilevel Analysis of Individual-Level Data and Area-Level Factors within Canada

Morassaei, Sara

Geographic Variation in Work Injuries: a Multilevel Analysis of Individual-Level Data and Area-Level Factors within Canada

Sunday, 17 August 2014

Exhibit hall (Dena'ina Center)

Sara Morassaei, BS , McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

F. Curtis Breslin, PhD , Seneca College of Applied Arts and Technology, Toronto, ON, Canada

Selahadin Ibrahim, MS , Institute for Work & Health, Toronto, ON, Canada

Peter M Smith, PhD , Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

Cameron A Mustard , University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Benjamin C Amick, PhD , University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX

Ketan Shankardass, PhD , Wilfred Laurier University, Waterloo, ON, Canada

Jeremy Petch, PhD , St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada

INTRODUCTION: This study sought to examine regional variation in work injuries and to assess whether contextual factors, such as area-level material and social deprivation, are associated with geographic variation in work injuries.

METHODS: Individual-level data from the 2003 and 2005 Canadian Community Health Survey was obtained for a representative sample of 89,541 Canadians aged 15 to 75 years old who reported working in the past 12 months. A multilevel regression model was conducted to identify geographic variation and contextual factors associated with the likelihood of reporting a medically attended work injury, while adjusting for demographic and work variables.

RESULTS: Provincial differences in work injuries were observed, even after controlling for other risk factors. Workers in western provinces such as Saskatchewan (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09e1.55), Alberta (AOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.51), and British Columbia (AOR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.26-1.71) had a higher risk of work injuries compared with Ontario workers. Indicators of area-level material and social deprivation were not associated with work injury risk.

CONCLUSIONS: Provincial differences in work injuries suggest that broader factors acting as determinants of work injuries are operating across workplaces at a provincial level. Future research needs to identify the provincial determinants and whether similar large area-level factors (e.g., state level in the United States) are driving work injuries in other countries.