Citation

Griffin SC, Bui DP, Gowrisankaran G, Lutz EA, He C, Hu C, Burgess JL. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2018; 60(3): 226-233.

Affiliation

Division of Community, Environment & Policy, Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health (MEZCOPH), The University of Arizona, PO Box 245215, Tucson, AZ 85724 (Griffin), Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health (MEZCOPH), The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA (Bui), Department of Economics, Eller College of Management, Tucson, AZ, USA (Gowrisankaran), Custos Fratris, 3LC, 333 Wilmot Road, Tucson, AZ 85711 (Lutz), Economist, Amazon.com, Seattle, WA, USA (He), Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health (MEZCOPH), The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA (Hu), Division of Community, Environment & Policy, Mel & Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health (MEZCOPH), The University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA (Burgess).

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/JOM.0000000000001245

PMID

29227357

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Risk management (RM) is a cyclical process of identifying and ranking risks, implementing controls, and evaluating their effectiveness. This study aims to identify effective RM interventions in the U.S. mining industry.

METHODS: RM interventions were identified in four companies representing metal, aggregate and coal mining sectors. Injury rates were determined using Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) data and changes in injury rates identified through change point analysis. Program implementation costs and associated changes in injury costs were evaluated for select interventions.

RESULTS: Six of twenty RM interventions were associated with a decline in all injuries and one with a reduction in lost-time injuries, all with a positive return on investment.

CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in injuries and associated costs were observed following implementation of a limited number of specific RM interventions.

Language: en