Association of Non-Organizational Factors and Occupational Accidents: A Field Study based on Structural Equation Modeling
Hossein Farahbod1, Samira Ghiyasi2*, Ahmad Soltanzadeh3
1. MSc in Health, Safety, Environment (HSE), Dept. of Health, Safety, and Environment, Faculty of Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran.
2. Assistant Prof., Dept. of Environmental Engineering, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
3. Assistant Prof., Dept. of Occupational Safety & Health Engineering, Research Center for Environmental Pollutants, Faculty of Health, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran.
* Corresponding author: Samira Ghiyasi; E-mail: s.ghiasi@iauctb.ac.ir
Abstract
Background: Non-organizational or non-occupational factors are among the most important risk factors that significantly influence the emergence of occupational accidents. This study aimed to investigate the association between non-organizational factors and occupational accidents.
Materials and Methods: In this descriptive study the structural equation modeling was applied on the data that was collected using a self-developed questionnaire. The random selected sample (n=360) included damaged people referred to the emergency department in Tehran province for treatment during a five-year period (2019-2015). The data analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS AMOS v. 23.0. The goodness of fit indices, including χ2/df, RMSEA, GFI, CFI, NFI, and TLI, were evaluated.
Results: The mean age and work experience of the experts' panel was 37.52±2.73 and 9.90±3.18 years, respectively. The Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the non-organizational factors of occupational accidents was calculated as 0.86. Generally, 35.3% of accidents were due to slip and fall, as well as falling the heavy object with 24.1%. The non-organizational index was estimated at 2.95. The factor analysis findings showed a statistically significant association between the non-organizational factors and the occupational accidents (p<0.05).
Conclusion: The results showed a reverse and significant association between the index of non-organizational factors with the title and type of accidents, cause of accidents, type of outcome or damage caused by accidents, and time of accident occurrence. Additionally, this index indicated a direct significant association with the gender, age, work experience, education, marital status, and the type of shift work schedule of the affected people.
Keywords: Occupational Accidents, Analysis, Structural Equation Modeling.
Introduction
Occupational accidents are unplanned and often destructive incidents that disrupt the performance, progress, or continuation of work. Occupational accidents are caused by unsafe acts, conditions, or a combination of these two. Additionally, these might be due to the weakness in the diagnosis or some failures in the risk management system in the workplace. In addition to physical harm and labor failure, the accidents could cause capital, equipment, and economic losses [1-3].
Several factors contribute to the incidence of occupational accidents, some of which are poor safety and work, size and magnitude of industry, lack of coordination, time pressure, financial and budgetary restraint, lack of data and standard information, poor organizational and non-organizational communication, workers' poor participation in safety issues, workers' expertise, inadequate training, fatigue and exhaustion, improper equipment selection, improper use or inspection, poor safety management or awareness, and lack of protective equipment [4, 5].
People in different occupational groups live in three environments of work, society, and family. Society is practically out of people's control. The family and its problems are personal and cannot be entered. In the workplace, conditions can be provided in which the worker, despite non-organizational concerns and mental preoccupations, can be at peace, and it can serve as a psychological and a local shelter, being used to avoid the issues [6, 7].
Some studies have shown that the combination or interaction of occupational and individual factors, as well as those of non-organizational and non-occupational, can be very effective in the occurrence and exacerbation of occupational accidents. Non-organizational factors are among the most important risk factors that have been less studied. These factors include individual and family psychological characteristics, the individual interaction with the family and the community, and the psychological and social lifestyle [8, 9].
Taghipour and Raznahan (2017) showed three components, including employee unsafe acts, forgetfulness, and perceived work pressure, to have a greater portion in occupational accidents [10]. In another study, Mohmmadbeigi et al. (2012) stated that mental health was a decisive factor in increasing labor productivity. Furthermore, the absence of a suitable mechanism to create balance to deal with tension caused job dissatisfaction, thus reduced work quality and incidence of accidents [11]. Malakoutikhah et al. (2017), modeling the relationship between work-family conflict and occupational accidents in the steel industry, indicated that work-family conflict as a social parameter could affect workers' concentration and health [12]. Another investigation concluded that psychosocial factors could affect various aspects of workers' health [13].
Given that occupational accidents include a large portion of human casualties in the set of incidents and diseases, and their causes are mostly human errors, most previous studies have focused on the work setting and organizational issues. s. Certainly, everyone might experience mental conflict and focus loss on work in progress [14]. One of the central elements in occupational accidents is social, family, and non-organizational psychological factors. Thus, controlling these factors can lead to a decrement in the occurrence of occupational accidents. In this paper, the relationship between non-organizational factors with occupational accidents is investigated and evaluated based on factor analysis. Few studies have been concerned evaluating the relationship between non-organizational factors and occupational accidents using factor analysis, and the authors have not found any study in Iran.
Materials and Methods
This study was a descriptive analysis conducted in 2020. The study population and statistical sample included damaged people referred to the emergency department in Tehran province for treatment during a five-year period (2019-2015). The sample size was calculated 382 using Cochran's formula (0.04 error level). These samples were selected by the simple random sampling method. Finally, 360 persons participated in the study (participation rate = 94.2%).
Eighteen standard questionnaires were used to analyze the relationship between non-organizational factors and occupational accidents. These questionnaires included Maslach burnout, job satisfaction, job stress, job preference, job commitment, job security, job performance, organizational citizenship behavior, service quality, work quality, organizational needs assessment, job commitment, multi-factor leadership, job social laziness, job enthusiasm scale, besides family events and changes. In the study, the items that could be used and cited from the questionnaire to analyze the relationship between non-organizational factors and occupational accidents were extracted from these 19 questionnaires.
Step one: Data of five-year accidents (2015-2019) were collected by referring to the 115 emergency database. At this stage, data collection was performed using the 115 emergency checklists, and data of 392 occupational accidents were collected.
Step two: In this step, 19 questionnaires were studied and evaluated. Based on the criteria and objectives of the study, including the analysis of the relationship between non-organizational factors and occupational accidents, the items were extracted from the questionnaires. This activity was performed by the research team and consultants, including the emergency and psychological experts. Finally, a 62-item questionnaire was extracted.
Step three: This step involved conducting a Delphi study. In order to determine the panel of experts in the Delphi study, more emphasis was placed on the quality and mastery of the participants in the study than on the quantity of the samples [15]. In other Delphi studies, the panel of experts had been selected based on purposeful and selective selection; based on this, 14 experts and specialists in the fields of health, safety, and environment (HSE), as well as psychology, were invited to study. After reviewing 19 questionnaires, 65 options were presented for the first round. It is noteworthy that the consensus level was considered equal to 70% (relative to the total number of respondents).
Step four: It included the study implementation phase. The confirmation questionnaire was given to 378 participants injured in the accidents.
Step five: Data analysis of this study was performed based on the study's objectives and using structural equation modeling.
IBM SPSS AMOS software version 23.0 was used to analyze the data. Statistical tests were two-way, and the significance level was less than 0.05. Structural equation modeling is a very general and robust multivariate analysis technique of the multivariate regression family that allows a set of regression equations to be tested simultaneously. It can reveal complex relationships between variables. It is advantageous to use SEM to understand the complex relationships between the various variables and factors directly or indirectly and covertly or explicitly involved in the occurrence of incidents. In addition, SEM is one of the strongest and most appropriate analysis methods in behavioral and social sciences research since the nature of such issues is multivariate and could not be solved in a two-variable way. Analysis of the covariance structures of the causal or structural equation models is one of the focal analysis methods of complex data structures. Therefore, since several independent variables exist that should be examined for their effect on dependent variables, structural equation modeling is necessary. Also, the goodness of fit of the models extracted and inferred from structural equation modeling using general indices, including χ2/df (2-3) and RMSEA (0.05-0-08), and comparative indices, including GFI, CFI, NFI, and NNFI or TLI (0.95-1.0), is evaluated [16, 17].
Results
The expert panel in Delphi included 22 experts in the field of HSE and psychology. According to the individual and demographic data of the study population, the mean age and work experience of this expert panel were 37.52±2.73 and 9.90±3.18 years, respectively. Evaluation of the education level of the expert panel showed that approximately one-fifth of the people with equal proportions had bachelor's and doctoral degrees (18.2%) and about three-fifths had master's degrees (63.6%). After three rounds of Delphi study, a 56-item questionnaire was approved to analyze the non-organizational factors affecting occupational accidents. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the questionnaire was calculated as 0.86.
Findings related to the evaluation of individual variables of injured persons in these incidents showed that the mean values of age and work experience were 40.22±10.12 and 9.23±7.72 years, respectively. Most of the participants had a diploma (32.0%), and the lowest had a master's degree or higher (7.8%). Furthermore, 62.0% of participants were single and 38.0% were married. 11.7% of the injured participants were women and 88.3% were male (Table 1).
Table 1. Demographical variables in studied individuals
Variables |
Mean/Frequency (SD/%) |
|
Age |
40.22 (10.12) |
|
Work experience |
9.23 (7.72) |
|
Education |
High school |
92 (25.5%) |
Diploma |
115 (32.0%) |
|
Associate of science |
75 (20.8%) |
|
Bachelor ≤ |
78 (21.7%) |
|
Marital status |
Married |
137(38.0%) |
Unmarried |
223 (62.0%) |
|
Gender |
Female |
42 (11.7%) |
Male |
318(88.3%) |
The accident type analysis showed that more than half of the accidents (392 accidents) were related to falls from heights (52.4%). The lowest rates were associated with electric shocks (9.0%), crushing (10.8%), and burns (11.4%). The portion of collision with objects was 16.4%. The results concerning the type of trauma caused by accidents showed that 61.4% of the accidents led to blunt trauma and 38.6% to penetrating trauma. These results showed that the most types of consequence or injury were related to perforation (penetrating wounds) (21.6%), contusion and soft tissue injury (15.5%), and scratching (13.6%). The lowest portion was associated with open limb fracture (3.3%), closed limb fracture (6.1%), and pelvic fracture (8.6%) (Table 2).
Table 2. Results of variables relevant to accidents in studied individuals
Variables |
Frequency (%) |
|
Accident |
Fall |
92 (52.4%) |
Electrocution |
115 (9.0%) |
|
Dealing with objects |
75 (16.4%) |
|
Crush |
50 (10.8%) |
|
burn |
28 (11.4%) |
|
Trauma type |
Blunt |
221 (61.4%) |
Penetrating |
139 (38.6%) |
|
Consequence /Injury |
Open fracture |
12 (3.3%) |
Closed fracture |
22 (6.1%) |
|
Hip fracture |
31 (8.6%) |
|
Dislocation |
39 (10.8%) |
|
Soft tissue injuries |
56 (15.5%) |
|
Laceration of vessels |
33 (9.2%) |
|
Simple incision |
40 (11.1%) |
|
Abrasion |
49 (13.6%) |
|
Puncture wound |
78 (21.6%) |
The analysis of the work shift type of injured people showed that 21.4% of the accidents occurred for day workers, 40.1% for night workers, and 38.5% for shift workers. 26.2% of the accidents occurred in the morning shift, 29.4% in the afternoon, and 44.4% in the night shift. In addition, 29.6% of the accidents happened in the first two days of the working week, 20.6% in the middle, and 49.8% in the last two days (Figure 1).