Work accidents with children and youth in a rural environment in southern Brazil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.3188.3243Keywords:
Accidents, Occupational, Child, Adolescent, Family, Rural Population, NursingAbstract
Objective: to know the prevalence of occupational accidents in children and youth who work with their families in the rural environment and to identify the associated factors. Method: exploratory, descriptive and analytical study with quantitative approach, developed in three rural areas. Participants were 211 children and young people who assisted the family in rural work. Data collection was performed using a semistructured questionnaire. Bivariate analysis was performed using Pearson’s chi-square, Fisher’s exact, Student’s t and Mann-Whitney tests and multivariate analysis using Poisson regression. Results: the prevalence of self-reported occupational accidents was 55%. It was highlighted: insect bites (44%), burns (40.5%), falls (27.6%), injury with a working tool (16.4%), electric shock (15.5 %), burn by animal (8.6%), animal bite (6.9%) and pesticide poisoning (2.6%). These were related to shared housing, leisure activity - riding a motorcycle, product resulting from lettuce cultivation and use of personal protective equipment. Conclusion: it is believed that these findings may enhance the development of public policies aimed at preserving the health of these children and young people, regulate working conditions and reduce occupational risks in the rural environment.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.