Data Driven Identification of Injury Risk Factors During Expansion on Irish Dairy Farms

Figures & data

Table 1. Distribution of dairy farm injuries by type, location, medical treatment and estimated work days lost in Ireland (n = 51).

	n	%
Person Injured
Farm Operator	42	82.3
Injury type
Livestock	20	39.2
Machinery (incl.Chainsaws)	21	37.3
Trip/falls, Buildings, Other.	12	23.5
Location
Farmyard	38	74.5
Building & Fields	13	35.5
Injury Treatment
Hospital treatment	39	76.5
Doctor, First Aid, None.	12	23.5
Estimated Work Days Lost
0–3	14	29.7
4–10	10	21.3
11–60	5	21.2
61 or more	13	27.7
Year of Injury
2017	13	25.4
2016	10	19.6
2015	14	27.4
2013/14	14	27.5

Table 2. Correlation and compare mean analysis of injury occurrence on Irish dairy farms with independent variables.

	Injury occurrence (N = 260)
Sets of variables	Yes (50^1, 19.2%)	No (210, 80.8%)	Crude odds of injury	Test	P value
Personal F.O. variables
V1. Age	52.1 ± 11.3	53.3 ± 10	N/A	-0.77^a	0.452
V2. Level of agricultural education				1.261^b	0.531
Low (61, 23.46%)	(13, 21.3%)	(48, 87.7%)	0.27
Medium (114, 43.85%)	(24, 21.1%)	(90, 78.9%)	0.27
High (85, 32.69%)	(13, 15.3%)	(72, 84.7%)	0.18
V3. Farm discussion group participation				1.067^b	0.301
Yes (120, 46.15%)	(24, 20%)	(96, 80%)	0.25
No (139, 53.47%)	(26, 18.7%)	(113, 81.3%)	0.23
V4. Extension’ service use
Yes (216, 83.08%)	(44, 20.4%)	(172, 79.6%)	0.26	1.067^a	0.301
No (44, 16.92%)		(38, 86.4%)	0.16
V5. Farm household size	3.44 ± 1.59	3.36 ± 1.46	N/A	-0.300^c	0.764
V6. Profit monitoring				1.112^a	0.292
Yes (123, 47.31%)	(27, 22%)	(96, 78%)	0.28
No (137, 52.69%)	(23, 16.8%)	(114, 83.2%)	0.20
Farm variables
V7. Derogation				5.337^b**	0.02
Yes (92, 35.38%)	(25, 27.2%)	(67, 72.8%)	0.37
No (164, 63.08%)	(25, 15.2%)	(139, 84.8%)	0.18
Missing (4, 1.54%)
V8. Soil class				2.659^b*	0.05
Good (153, 58.85%)	(34, 22.2%)	(119, 77.8%)	0.29
Poor (106, 40.77%)	(15, 14.2%)	(91, 85.8%)	0.16
Missing (1, 0.38%)
V9.Region				4.877^b	0.02
SE (204, 78.46%)	(45, 22.1%)	(159, 77.9%)	0.28
BMW (56, 21.54%)		(51, 91.1%)	0.10
V10. Work status				0.971^a	0.241
Full-time (240, 92.31%)	(44, 18.3%)	(196, 81.7%)	0.22
Part-time (18, 6.92%)		(13, 72.2%)	0.38
Missing (2, 0.77%)
V11. Gross output (€)	(275718.96 ± 160135.48)	(237597.91 ± 144466.56)	N/A	-1.54^c	0.12
V12. Family farm income (€)	(116422.25 ± 79142.16)	(97694.69 ± 59471.31)	N/A	-1.20^c	0.24
V13. Family size (Ha)	(76.49 ± 43.08)	(67.66 ± 34.23)	N/A	-1.12^c	0.21
V14. Labor units	(1.96 ± 0.86)	(1.67 ± 0.71)	N/A	2.26^c**	0.01
V15. Standard man-days	(661.15 ± 350.46)	(557.28 ± 304.9)	N/A	2.59^c*	0.04
V16. Hours worked	(2485.62 ± 607.41)	(2458.17 ± 537.05)	N/A	0.316^c	0.20
V17. Total machinery cost (1000€)	(8.72 ± 4.18)	(7.74 ± 4.41)	N/A	0.437^c	0.50
V18. Total Investment in machinery (1000€)	(22.55 ± 9.1)	(22.66 ± 10.43)	N/A	0.302^c	0.50
Farm rate variables
V19. Gross Output/Ha	(3642.48 ± 1135.03)	(3533.04 ± 1156.71)	N/A	0.099	0.62
V20. Gross Output/Livestock Unit	(1778.90 ± 301.81)	(1809.25 ± 370.28)	N/A	-0.538	0.59
V21. Gross Output/Labor Unit	(143540.87 ± 57887.92)	(143128.25 ± 68611.92)	N/A	0.476 ^c	0.64
V22. Investment/Ha	(15359.53 ± 9418.62)	(13434.64 ± 7041.78)	N/A	3.56 ^c*	0.04
V23. Investment/Livestock Unit	(11479.01 ± 4691.94)	(12097.39 ± 5070.81)	N/A	0.099 ^c	0.87
V24. Investment/Labor Unit	(1704297.89 ± 1171246.84)	(1491107.56, ±927224.62)	N/A	-0.972 ^c	0.35
V25. Gross Margin/Ha	(2419.42 ± 843.26)	(2319.28 ± 811.37)	N/A	0.778 ^c	0.43
V26. Gross Margin/Livestock Unit	(94949.42 ± 38299.07)	(94109.29 ± 45154.88)	N/A	-0.445 ^c	0.64
V27. FFI/Ha	(1523.74 ± 689.33)	(1473.80 ± 619.69)	N/A	-0.312 ^c	0.75
V28. FFI/Livestock Unit	(11479.01 ± 4691.94)	(12097.39 ± 5070.81)	N/A	-0.383 ^c	0.71
V29. FFI/Labor Unit	(59452.91 ± 27748.04)	(59844.64 ± 31681.27)	N/A	0.396 ^c	0.63
V30. Livestock unit/Ha	(2.05 ± 0.52)	(1.94 ± 0.50)	N/A	1.229^c	0.22
V31. Livestock unit/Labor Unit	(81.14 ± 32.20)	(79.29 ± 35.84)	N/A	1.558 ^c	0.51
V32. Farm Change
V33. Positive change in gross output				0.635a	0.42
Yes (179, 68.85%)	(36, 20.1%)	(143, 79.9%)	0.25
No (26, 10%)		(19, 73.1%)	0.37
Missing (55, 21.15%)
V34. Positive change in Labor Units				4.580^b*	0.03
Yes (99, 38.08%)	(27, 27.3%)	(72, 72.7%)	0.38
No (106, 47.77%)	(16, 15.1%)	(72, 72.7%)	0.18
Missing (55, 21.15%)
V35. Positive change in Standard Man–Days				0.535	0.465
Yes (129, 49.62%)	(25, 19.4%)	(104, 80.6%)	0.24
No (76, 29.23%)	(18, 23.7%)	(58, 76.3%)	0.31
Missing (55, 21.15%)
V36. Positive change in Land Farmed				0.0	0.99
Yes (105, 40.34%)	(22, 21%)	(83, 79%)	0.25
No (100, 38.46%)	(21, 21%)	(79, 79%)	0.27
Missing (55, 21.15%)

¹Out of the 51 dairy farmers who reported injury occurrences, one victim’s information was missing or incomplete. Consequently, 50 victims were included in the correlation and inferential analysis.

^aIndependent samples T-test.

^bChi-square test.

^cIndependent samples Mann-Whitney U test.

Table 3. Factor affecting injury occurrence in Irish dairy farms.

Independent variables	Dependent Variable: Injury occurrence or non-occurrence Bivariate regression
	OR	95% CI	P
Positive change in Labor Units
Yes	2.109
No	(Indicator variable)	1.056–4.21	.01
Derogation
Yes	2.07
No	(Indicator variable)	1.10–3.88	.029
Soil class
Good	1.73	0.89–3.78	.042
Bad	(Indicator variable)
Region
SE	0.446	0.13–0.92	.035
BMW
Labor units	0.662	0.45–0.96	.032
Standard man-days	0.999	0.99–1	.041
Investment/Ha	1.230	1.1–1.35	.05

Data availability statement

Summary statistics can be made available from the corresponding author.