Prevalence and Reporting of Occupational Illness by Company Size

Population Trends and Regulatory Implications

Tim Morse, Charles Dillon, Joseph Weber, Nick Warren, Heather Bruneau, Rongwei (Rochelle) Fu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

26 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Reports of occupational disease using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)/OSHA survey have shown increasing rates with larger establishment size. The literature is divided on whether this pattern in an artifact of under-reporting in smaller businesses or is the result of differences in underlying risk-factors. Methods: A population-based survey [the Connecticut Upper-Extremity, Surveillance Project (CUSP)] assessing prevalence of likely work related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in CT, coded by establishment size, is compared to CT MSD incidence rates based on the BLS/OSHA survey. Results: When analyses were controlled for age, gender, physical risks, and occupation, there was a marginally significant association between business size and the rate of MSD [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, CI 0.82-1.01], but in the opposite direction of the BLS/OSHA rates, with larger businesses having somewhat lower rates of MSD. Reported risk factors varied in a similar direction, though with mid-sized companies having the highest physical risks. Conclusions: The increased rates of occupational illness in larger businesses reported in the BLS/OSHA survey does not appear to be due to actual incidence or distribution of risk factors, but appears more likely to be due to under-reporting in smaller businesses. Estimates based on the assumption that the ORs based on size are actually similar to the CUSP population survey results suggest that MSD incidence is approximately 3.6-times the reported rates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)361-370
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican Journal of Industrial Medicine
Volume45
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2004
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Occupational Diseases
United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration
Population Density
Small Business
Upper Extremity
Incidence
Population Surveillance
Occupations
Artifacts
Odds Ratio
Surveys and Questionnaires
Population

Keywords

  • Business size
  • Ergonomics
  • MSD
  • Occupational illness
  • Surveillance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Prevalence and Reporting of Occupational Illness by Company Size : Population Trends and Regulatory Implications. / Morse, Tim; Dillon, Charles; Weber, Joseph; Warren, Nick; Bruneau, Heather; Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle).

In: American Journal of Industrial Medicine, Vol. 45, No. 4, 04.2004, p. 361-370.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Morse, Tim ; Dillon, Charles ; Weber, Joseph ; Warren, Nick ; Bruneau, Heather ; Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle). / Prevalence and Reporting of Occupational Illness by Company Size : Population Trends and Regulatory Implications. In: American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 2004 ; Vol. 45, No. 4. pp. 361-370.
@article{a1084df074204bf99b4eaec68f93be22,
title = "Prevalence and Reporting of Occupational Illness by Company Size: Population Trends and Regulatory Implications",
abstract = "Background: Reports of occupational disease using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)/OSHA survey have shown increasing rates with larger establishment size. The literature is divided on whether this pattern in an artifact of under-reporting in smaller businesses or is the result of differences in underlying risk-factors. Methods: A population-based survey [the Connecticut Upper-Extremity, Surveillance Project (CUSP)] assessing prevalence of likely work related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in CT, coded by establishment size, is compared to CT MSD incidence rates based on the BLS/OSHA survey. Results: When analyses were controlled for age, gender, physical risks, and occupation, there was a marginally significant association between business size and the rate of MSD [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, CI 0.82-1.01], but in the opposite direction of the BLS/OSHA rates, with larger businesses having somewhat lower rates of MSD. Reported risk factors varied in a similar direction, though with mid-sized companies having the highest physical risks. Conclusions: The increased rates of occupational illness in larger businesses reported in the BLS/OSHA survey does not appear to be due to actual incidence or distribution of risk factors, but appears more likely to be due to under-reporting in smaller businesses. Estimates based on the assumption that the ORs based on size are actually similar to the CUSP population survey results suggest that MSD incidence is approximately 3.6-times the reported rates.",
keywords = "Business size, Ergonomics, MSD, Occupational illness, Surveillance",
author = "Tim Morse and Charles Dillon and Joseph Weber and Nick Warren and Heather Bruneau and Fu, {Rongwei (Rochelle)}",
year = "2004",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1002/ajim.10354",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "361--370",
journal = "American Journal of Industrial Medicine",
issn = "0271-3586",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prevalence and Reporting of Occupational Illness by Company Size

T2 - Population Trends and Regulatory Implications

AU - Morse, Tim

AU - Dillon, Charles

AU - Weber, Joseph

AU - Warren, Nick

AU - Bruneau, Heather

AU - Fu, Rongwei (Rochelle)

PY - 2004/4

Y1 - 2004/4

N2 - Background: Reports of occupational disease using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)/OSHA survey have shown increasing rates with larger establishment size. The literature is divided on whether this pattern in an artifact of under-reporting in smaller businesses or is the result of differences in underlying risk-factors. Methods: A population-based survey [the Connecticut Upper-Extremity, Surveillance Project (CUSP)] assessing prevalence of likely work related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in CT, coded by establishment size, is compared to CT MSD incidence rates based on the BLS/OSHA survey. Results: When analyses were controlled for age, gender, physical risks, and occupation, there was a marginally significant association between business size and the rate of MSD [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, CI 0.82-1.01], but in the opposite direction of the BLS/OSHA rates, with larger businesses having somewhat lower rates of MSD. Reported risk factors varied in a similar direction, though with mid-sized companies having the highest physical risks. Conclusions: The increased rates of occupational illness in larger businesses reported in the BLS/OSHA survey does not appear to be due to actual incidence or distribution of risk factors, but appears more likely to be due to under-reporting in smaller businesses. Estimates based on the assumption that the ORs based on size are actually similar to the CUSP population survey results suggest that MSD incidence is approximately 3.6-times the reported rates.

AB - Background: Reports of occupational disease using the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)/OSHA survey have shown increasing rates with larger establishment size. The literature is divided on whether this pattern in an artifact of under-reporting in smaller businesses or is the result of differences in underlying risk-factors. Methods: A population-based survey [the Connecticut Upper-Extremity, Surveillance Project (CUSP)] assessing prevalence of likely work related musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) in CT, coded by establishment size, is compared to CT MSD incidence rates based on the BLS/OSHA survey. Results: When analyses were controlled for age, gender, physical risks, and occupation, there was a marginally significant association between business size and the rate of MSD [odds ratio (OR) = 0.91, CI 0.82-1.01], but in the opposite direction of the BLS/OSHA rates, with larger businesses having somewhat lower rates of MSD. Reported risk factors varied in a similar direction, though with mid-sized companies having the highest physical risks. Conclusions: The increased rates of occupational illness in larger businesses reported in the BLS/OSHA survey does not appear to be due to actual incidence or distribution of risk factors, but appears more likely to be due to under-reporting in smaller businesses. Estimates based on the assumption that the ORs based on size are actually similar to the CUSP population survey results suggest that MSD incidence is approximately 3.6-times the reported rates.

KW - Business size

KW - Ergonomics

KW - MSD

KW - Occupational illness

KW - Surveillance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=1842680264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=1842680264&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ajim.10354

DO - 10.1002/ajim.10354

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 361

EP - 370

JO - American Journal of Industrial Medicine

JF - American Journal of Industrial Medicine

SN - 0271-3586

IS - 4

ER -