Workers’ Compensation Claims in the Ambulance Services Industry

Monday, June 5, 2017: 4:44 PM
440, Boise Centre
Audrey A. Reichard , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV
Ibraheem S. Al-Tarawneh , Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, Pickerington, OH
Srinivas Konda , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, WV
Chia Wei , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
Steven J Wurzelbacher , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
Alysha R. Meyers , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
Stephen J. Bertke , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
P. Timothy Bushnell , CDC/National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH
Michael P. Lampl , Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, Pickerington, OH
David C. Robins , Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, Pickerington, OH

BACKGROUND: Workers in the ambulance services industry are regularly exposed to workplace hazards, including lifting, transporting patients in emergency situations, and unpredictable work environments. Consequently, their nonfatal occupational injury rate has been shown to be as much as three times higher than that of the general workforce. This study aimed to expand the understanding of injury risks within this industry, which is a critical step toward reducing the impact of injuries on this workforce. 

METHODS: We analyzed private employer Ohio Bureau of Workers’ Compensation claims from 2001-2011. This analysis was restricted to claims with a North American Industry Classification System code of “Ambulance Services” (62191). We included lost-time (>7 days away from work) and medical only claims, and used this distinction as a proxy for injury severity. Manual and auto-coding processes were used to apply Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System event or exposure codes to all claims. We calculated claim counts and rates. Poisson regression was used to assess the annual injury rate trend.

RESULTS: In our preliminary analysis, 5,882 ambulance services industry claims were identified from 2001-2011 with a rate of 11.1 claims per 100 estimated full-time equivalents. On average, the claim rate decreased by 3.4% (95% CI: 2.6–4.2%) per year over the study period. Almost 20% of claims were classified as lost-time. Claims were distributed almost evenly by sex. Workers between 25 and 44 years-old accounted for almost two-thirds of claims. Almost half of all claims were attributed to overexertion involving an outside source, and more than 90% of these occurred during patient handling activities. An additional 12% were attributed to roadway incidents involving motorized land vehicles. Other common injury events included falling on the same level (7%); being struck by objects or equipment (5%); and needlestick injuries (5%).

CONCLUSIONS: Although the claim rate decreased, the rate of workers’ compensation claims in the ambulance services industry remained higher than all other large private industry sector rates in Ohio. These high rates, combined with the projected growth for this workforce in the future, confirm that injury prevention among ambulance services workers should be a priority. Efforts should continue to focus on designing, implementing, and evaluating prevention interventions specific to patient handling injuries. Interventions should also address motor vehicle incidents, falls, and needlestick injuries.