The association of the original OSHA chemical hazard communication standard with reductions in acute work injuries/illnesses in private industry and the industrial releases of chemical carcinogens.

BACKGROUND: OSHA predicted the original chemical Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) would cumulatively reduce the lost workday acute injury/illness rate for exposure events by 20% over 20 years and reduce exposure to chemical carcinogens. METHODS: JoinPoint trend software identified changes in the rate of change of BLS rates for days away from work for acute injuries/illnesses during 1992-2009 for manufacturing and nonmanufacturing industries for both chemical, noxious or allergenic injury exposure events and All other exposure events. The annual percent change in the rates was used to adjust observed numbers of cases to estimate their association with the standard. A case-control study of EPA's Toxic Release Inventory 1988-2009 data compared carcinogen and non-carcinogens' releases. RESULTS: The study estimates that the HCS was associated with a reduction in the number of acute injuries/illnesses due to chemical injury exposure events over the background rate in the range 107,569-459,395 (Hudson method/modified BIC model) depending on whether the HCS is treated as a marginal or sole factor in the decrease. Carcinogen releases have declined at a substantially faster rate than control non-carcinogens. DISCUSSION: The previous HCS standard was associated with significant reductions in chemical event acute injuries/illnesses and chemical carcinogen exposures.

The need for data harmonization--a response to Boden and Ozonoff.

Boden and Ozonoff's undercount estimates in their recent Commentary rely on three assumptions for which no quantitative literature references are provided. Alternatively, we show that findings in both studies and published data indicate lower upper-bound estimates for the undercount range. Am. J. Ind. Med. 53:854-855, 2010. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The law and incomplete database information as confounders in epidemiologic research on occupational injuries and illnesses.

BACKGROUND: Capture-recapture studies report undercounting of work injuries/illnesses with days away from work (DAFW) in the Bureau of Labor Statistics annual Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (BLS SOII) by 25-68% depending on the state and undercounting by various state workers' compensation (WC) systems of eligible claims by 5-35%. METHODS: Statutory/regulatory criteria defining eligible cases are used to adjust counts in the 1998-2001 Minnesota's WC system and the BLS SOII to permit comparison and to evaluate the recent studies. Missing information in the employer database used in the capture-recapture studies is tabulated. An attempt is made to harmonize results with two additional databases counting work injuries. RESULTS: Counts in the BLS SOII moderately undercount by 10-16% the number of WC cases. We believe that matching in capture-recapture studies is adversely affected by misperceptions regarding the application of statutory/regulatory eligibility criteria and by missing data. The result is that the reported undercounts in both the BLS SOII and several state WC databases are overstated in the capture-recapture studies. Although three of four databases can be approximately harmonized, the fourth cannot. CONCLUSIONS: More precisely targeted information is needed before decisions regarding redesign of the BLS survey are made or before legislative or administrative changes in the WC are contemplated.

Methodologic issues in the use of workers' compensation databases for the study of work injuries with days away from work. I. Sensitivity of case ascertainment.

BACKGROUND: Case ascertainment costs vary substantially between primary and secondary data sources. This review summarizes information on the sensitivity of state administrative databases in workers' compensation systems for the ascertainment of days-away-from-work (DAFW) work injuries for use in modeling studies. METHODS: Review of the literature supplemented by data from governmental or organizational reports or produced for this report. RESULTS: Employers currently appear to provide workers' compensation insurance coverage for 98.9% of wage and salary workers. Wage and salary jobs account for approximately 90% of jobs in the United States. In industries such as manufacturing, the fraction of covered jobs is probably closer to 98%. In Minnesota, the number of DAFW cases ascertained by the Bureau of Labor Statistics' annual survey of occupational injuries and illnesses is approximately 92-97% concordant with the number of wage compensation claims for injuries producing DAFW over the period 1992-2000, once adjustments are made to permit direct comparisons of the numbers. The workers' compensation databases provide information for more than 95% of the total DAFW resulting from work injuries. Covariate estimates are unaffected by this less than 5% loss because effects appear dependent on time from injury. CONCLUSIONS: Statewide workers' compensation administrative databases can have substantial utility for epidemiologic study of work injuries with DAFW because of their size, using high sensitivity for case ascertainment as the evaluative criterion.