Injury risks and socioeconomic groups in different settings. Differences in morbidity between men and between women at working ages

Laflamme, Lucie; Eilert-Petersson, E.

doi:10.1093/eurpub/11.3.309

SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.

RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ

CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Injury risks and socioeconomic groups in different settings. Differences in morbidity between men and between women at working ages
Citation	Laflamme L, Eilert-Petersson E. Eur. J. Public Health 2001; 11(3): 309-313.
Affiliation	Karolinska Institutet, Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Social Medicine, SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden. lucie.laflamme@phs.ki.se
Copyright	(Copyright © 2001, Oxford University Press)
DOI	10.1093/eurpub/11.3.309
PMID	11582612
Abstract	BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether greater injury risk in lower socioeconomic groups at working ages is attributable to differences in work conditions or a reflection of a wider overall pattern of risk. The current study investigates socioeconomic differences in non-fatal injury risks in a variety of settings. METHODS: Data were taken from a community-based injury register built up over one year (November 1989 to October 1990) in a semi-urban Swedish municipality (256,510 inhabitants), and then linked by record to Sweden's National Population Register (based on the census of 1990). Injuries among the age group 20-64 were considered. Age-standardized odds ratios were computed by gender for five injury settings and four socioeconomic groups, using salaried employees as the reference group. RESULTS: Compared with salaried employees, male manual workers and from the unspecified population (long-term unemployed, students, etc.) show an excess risk of injury in all settings except sports. Males from all socioeconomic groups show significantly higher morbidity in production/education areas. Female manual workers show significantly higher morbidity in home settings and in production/education; those from the unspecified population, in home settings, transport areas, and 'other areas'. CONCLUSION: Higher morbidity in lower socioeconomic groups results not only from work-related differences, where 25% of the injuries analysed were incurred, but also from the differential impacts of other living environments, e.g. home and transport areas. Differences between socioeconomic groups in care seeking, injury lethality, injury susceptibility, and risk exposure may influence the social patterning of injury morbidity.