Selecting target populations for ROPS retrofit programs in Pennsylvania and Vermont.

Agriculture has the highest injury and fatality rates when compared with other U.S. industries, and tractor overturns remain the leading cause of agricultural fatalities. Rollover protection structures (ROPS) are the only proven devices to protect a tractor operator in the event of an overturn. These devices are 99% effective when used with a seatbelt. Nearly 49% of tractors in the U.S. are not equipped with a ROPS. Interventions such as social marketing, community awareness campaigns, and financial incentives have been directed at encouraging farmers to install ROPS on their unprotected tractors. The purpose of this study was to conduct similar comparisons of ROPS protection and readiness to retrofit in different segments of the Vermont and Pennsylvania farm communities. A telephone survey was used to collect data on ROPS prevalence, farm demographic characteristics, and farmer's stage of change relative to installing ROPS on farm tractors. Our data provide new and unique information on the prevalence of ROPS-equipped tractors relative to commodity, farm size, and a variety of other demographic variables. Extrapolating from these data, the commodities studied account for roughly 162,072 tractors across the two states. Of these, 85,927 (53%) do not have ROPS. Of these unprotected tractors, 77,203 are in Pennsylvania and 8,724 are in Vermont. Our other two research questions dealt with the farmer's stage of change and possible ways to segment this population. The stage of change portion of our work demonstrates that most Pennsylvania and Vermont farmers are not contemplating ROPS retrofitting in the near future. Since no major differences were found in the stage of change, the number of unprotected tractors was examined for each of the commodity groups. In Pennsylvania, 29% of all unprotected tractors were found on cash crop farms. This trend was even more apparent on smaller farms than large farms. This led to the selection of smaller cash crop farms as the target audience for social marketing messages. In contrast, researchers in Vermont found a bimodal distribution of unprotected tractors. Of all the commodity groups surveyed in Vermont, vegetable and cash crop farmers were least likely to have even one protected tractor to use on the farm. Probably the most encouraging finding from this study is that over 85% of Pennsylvania farms and over 87% of Vermont farms surveyed had at least one tractor available that had ROPS protection. Of those farms, 25.5% of the Pennsylvania farms and 46% of the Vermont farms have ROPS on all of their tractors. Both of these findings were greater than the findings from a 2006 survey of New York State farms, which found that 75% of surveyed New York farms have ROPS on at least one tractor and 18% have ROPS on all tractors. Even with these encouraging data, the goal of 100% of tractors with ROPS is far from being met. There are still an estimated 90,000 unprotected tractors on Pennsylvania and Vermont farms, and these farm owners are currently unmotivated to install ROPS. However as demonstrated in New York State, it may be possible to use social marketing that combines persuasive messages and cost-sharing to persuade these farmers that ROPS are indeed important and accessible.

National Safe Tractor and Machinery Operation Program: development and content evaluation.

Guidelines in the U.S. Department of Labor's Hazardous Occupations Order in Agriculture (AgHO) regulations state that youth can receive tractor safety certification after participating in a 10-hour course, or receive tractor and machinery safety certification after participating in a 20-hour course. An additional four hours of orientation to on-farm hazards and general safety is required to receive full certification in a 24-hour course. Previous research has shown that traditional safety education certification programs were conducted with non-standardized methods and old curriculum materials. The objective of the National Safe Tractor and Machinery Operation Program (NSTMOP) project was to design an effective, efficient, and accountable youth farm machinery certification program with national uniformity and a single set of economically producible instructional materials with demonstrated content validity. The format for the NSTMOP project was guided by focus groups, a national steering committee, and selected agricultural safety educators. Primary curriculum materials include a task sheet format, and new skills and driving evaluations. Data analysis indicates that the instructional materials, the instructional plan, and the evaluation of student participants satisfactorily met the objectives of the NSTMOP project and the AgHO regulations.

Utilizing expert panels in agricultural safety and health research.

This article reports on the use of expert panels by Purdue University's Agricultural Safety and Health Program staff to address three separate research questions related to: (1) developing strategies for the prevention of flowing grain engulfments, (2) evaluation of commercial lifts used by operators with restricted mobility to gain access to agricultural tractors and equipment, and (3) identifying essential competencies for youth enrolled in federally mandated tractor and machinery certification programs. Advantages and disadvantages associated with the use of expert panels are addressed, and specific examples of outcomes are presented. Recommendations for using expert panels during research projects are also included.

Evaluation of the Farm and Agricultural Injury Classification Code and follow-up questionnaire.

The Farm and Agricultural Injury Classification (FAIC) code was developed specifically to identify and classify all agricultural injuries of interest to agricultural safety and health professionals. The FAIC code overcomes fundamental problems of classifying agricultural-related injuries by grouping incidents into categories describing actual exposures encountered on farms and in agricultural work. The successful application of the FAIC code depends largely on a researcher's ability to obtain appropriate information to correctly use the code. The purpose of this research project was to: (1) compare data obtained through a newly developed FAIC follow-up questionnaire (FQ) with data from the Penn State Agricultural Injury Database (AID); and (2) test FAIC Code utility, reliability, and construct validity with agricultural safety and health professionals. The FQ improved classification of 57% of cases in the Penn State AID. A majority of agricultural health and safety professionals understood and used the FAIC coding system, without training, to code an average of 75% of the test cases the same as the researcher. A large majority of the professionals that participated in this study judged the FAIC code and the accompanying materials to be very useful.