Nonfatal agricultural work-related injuries: A case study from Northeast India.

BACKGROUND: Occupational injuries are a major problem in agriculture worldwide. In the Northeast region of India, most of the farm operations are carried out manually with hand operated tools and equipment. These tools also cause some nonfatal accidents. In the absence of reliable data on accidents in this region, injury prevention policy cannot be madeOBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to survey injury causing agricultural accidents occurring during 2010 to 2013 in Arunachal Pradesh of the northeast region to know their magnitude, causes and severity. PARTICIPANTS: In this study, four districts of Arunachal Pradesh namely Papum Pare, Lower Subansiri, West Siang and East Siang were chosen using purposive sampling. From each district, 15 villages were selected. In these villages, a total of 50614 agricultural workers participated and 174 and 48 injuries were found for male and female workers respectively. METHOD: A case-control study was carried out in Arunachal Pradesh. The questionnaire-based approach was used for data collection. The questionnaire contains detailed information on the demographic and injury characteristics. The Demographic information included gender, age, educational background, etc. and injury characteristics included the nature of the injury, the body part injured, and type of tools and equipment that caused the injury. RESULTS: The results showed that farm tools and equipment-related accidents were maximum i.e. 144 (60%) caused due to dao followed by 19 from spade (8%), 18 from sickle (7%) and 8 from axe (3%). The foot and legs were the most frequently injured body parts. From this study, it was also revealed that male agricultural workers are more affected as compared to their female counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Agricultural accident incident rate (AIR) was found to be 589 per 1,00,000 workers per year. The AIR for males is 462 per 100,000 workers per year which is 3.6 times higher than female workers. The root causes of accidents are the use of traditional tools and equipment in various agricultural activities. Therefore, any ergonomic interventions in designing tools and equipment will significantly improve the occupational health and safety of workers.

Impact of ergonomic intervention in manual orange harvester among the workers of hilly region in India.

BACKGROUND: Manual orange harvesting is very laborious, time consuming and unsafe operation whereas neither mechanical harvesting nor mechanized hand harvesting is possible in north-east India due to its hilly terrains. The awkward postures and repetitive nature of work in orange harvesting, demands a comfortable and appropriate hand harvester for hilly region. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a manual orange harvester for hilly regions considering the ergonomic parameters, and compare the performance with the existing models of the manual harvester. PARTICIPANTS: In this study twenty healthy experienced orchard workers (10 male and 10 female) participated who did not have any previous functional musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: We developed a manual orange harvester by eliminating the problems associated with the existing harvesters. The developed model along with existing models was evaluated extensively in the field. During evaluations, heart rate of the subjects was measured and oxygen consumption was predicted to calculate the energy expenditure rate (EER) from the established relationship in the laboratory before the field experiments. Further, performance parameters of orange harvester i.e. plucking rate (PR), damaged quantity (DQ), plucking energy requirement (PER) and discomfort rating were also observed. RESULTS: The PR was 425, 300 and 287 pieces per hour for the developed model (DM), first existing model (EM1) and second existing model (EM2), respectively. The DM showed lower PER (2.14 kJ/piece) followed by EM2 (2.95 kJ/piece) and EM1 (4.02 kJ/piece) which is considered as overall performance as it includes energy per unit of plucking. Further, the body part discomfort score revealed that DM was more comfortable in use followed by EM2 and EM1. CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the DM was found better in terms of plucking rate, energy requirement and body part discomfort than the other existing models. Shoulders and neck are the most affected body parts where all subjects felt severe discomfort.