Identifying root causes of construction injuries

Hinze, J; Pedersen, C and Fredley, J (1998) Identifying root causes of construction injuries. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(1), pp. 67-71. ISSN 0733-9364

Abstract

Accident prevention begins with having a clear understanding of those factors that play key roles in their causation. One source of information on the causes associated with many serious injuries and fatalities is maintained by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). This essential information is contained in abstracts that are brief descriptions of the conditions and circumstances that were existent at the time of the accidents. Unfortunately, the information cannot be retrieved readily. This paper presents recommendations on how the OSHA reports could be made more meaningful. First, injuries should be coded into one of the 20 possible cause categories, rather than the traditional five groups of falls, struck-by, electric shock, caught in/between, and other. Additional or secondary cause codes also were developed. If these cause codes were adopted and used to describe all accidents recorded by OSHA, relevant data retrieval may be more effective. This information could then be utilized to focus greater attention on those areas for which modifications in the regulations are warranted and it would be more helpful to the construction industry by emphasizing the major causes of serious accidents.

Item Type: Article
Index terms: regulation, data retrieval, injury, accident prevention, fatalities, construction industry, occupational safety and health, falls
Subjects: health risk and incident analysis, environmental health, political science, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, occupational health and safety management, data management
Topics: Sustainability, Governance, Health and Safety, Research Practice, Digital Applications
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here