Agricultural Injuries With Dementia: Double Whammy?

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
American journal of industrial medicine Pub Date : 2026-06-06 Epub Date: 2026-04-16 DOI:10.1002/ajim.70082
Kanika Arora, Jonathan Davis, Lila B. Basnet, Julie Bobitt
{"title":"Agricultural Injuries With Dementia: Double Whammy?","authors":"Kanika Arora,&nbsp;Jonathan Davis,&nbsp;Lila B. Basnet,&nbsp;Julie Bobitt","doi":"10.1002/ajim.70082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Nearly 40% of US farmers are over 65 years old. Some emerging evidence links agricultural occupational exposure to increased dementia risk. However, little is known about dementia and injury outcomes in agricultural settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We employed data from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Programs Participant Use File (ACS-TQP-PUF) (2017–2021), identifying individuals aged ≥ 60 with (1) agricultural injuries and dementia (Group 1; <i>N</i> = 318), (2) agricultural injuries without dementia (Group 2; <i>N</i> = 21,361), and (3) dementia without agricultural injuries (Group 3; <i>N</i> = 231,231). Injury mechanisms were compared across groups using chi-square tests. Injury severity was assessed via Injury Severity Score and the use of intensive care unit (ICU) or surgical care by hospitalized patients. Generalized ordered logit and logistic regression models estimated associations between group membership and injury severity, adjusting for demographics and comorbidities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Falls caused 94% of traumatic injuries in individuals with dementia alone but accounted for only 35% of injuries in those with both agricultural injuries and dementia. Group 1 and Group 2 experienced a broader range of injury mechanisms including motor vehicle traffic, transport, and environmental incidents. Compared to Group 3, Group 1 had higher probability of experiencing major injuries and receiving ICU/surgical care. Injury severity was largely similar between Groups 1 and 2.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>This cross-sectional study provides suggestive evidence that older adults with dementia and agricultural injuries experience more severe outcomes than those in nonagricultural settings. Future research should explore this group in greater depth as well as the implications for dementia caregivers in agricultural communities.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":"69 7","pages":"575-582"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajim.70082","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajim.70082","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/4/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Nearly 40% of US farmers are over 65 years old. Some emerging evidence links agricultural occupational exposure to increased dementia risk. However, little is known about dementia and injury outcomes in agricultural settings.

Methods

We employed data from the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Programs Participant Use File (ACS-TQP-PUF) (2017–2021), identifying individuals aged ≥ 60 with (1) agricultural injuries and dementia (Group 1; N = 318), (2) agricultural injuries without dementia (Group 2; N = 21,361), and (3) dementia without agricultural injuries (Group 3; N = 231,231). Injury mechanisms were compared across groups using chi-square tests. Injury severity was assessed via Injury Severity Score and the use of intensive care unit (ICU) or surgical care by hospitalized patients. Generalized ordered logit and logistic regression models estimated associations between group membership and injury severity, adjusting for demographics and comorbidities.

Results

Falls caused 94% of traumatic injuries in individuals with dementia alone but accounted for only 35% of injuries in those with both agricultural injuries and dementia. Group 1 and Group 2 experienced a broader range of injury mechanisms including motor vehicle traffic, transport, and environmental incidents. Compared to Group 3, Group 1 had higher probability of experiencing major injuries and receiving ICU/surgical care. Injury severity was largely similar between Groups 1 and 2.

Conclusions

This cross-sectional study provides suggestive evidence that older adults with dementia and agricultural injuries experience more severe outcomes than those in nonagricultural settings. Future research should explore this group in greater depth as well as the implications for dementia caregivers in agricultural communities.

Abstract Image

农业伤害与痴呆:双重打击?
背景:近40%的美国农民年龄在65岁以上。一些新出现的证据表明,农业职业暴露与痴呆症风险增加有关。然而,人们对农业环境中的痴呆和损伤结果知之甚少。方法:我们使用来自美国外科医师学会创伤质量计划参与者使用档案(ACS-TQP-PUF)(2017-2021)的数据,确定年龄≥60岁的个体(1)农业损伤和痴呆(1组,N = 318),(2)农业损伤无痴呆(2组,N = 21,361),(3)无农业损伤痴呆(3组,N = 231,231)。采用卡方检验比较各组间的损伤机制。通过损伤严重程度评分和住院患者使用重症监护病房(ICU)或手术治疗来评估损伤严重程度。广义有序logit和逻辑回归模型估计了群体成员和损伤严重程度之间的关联,调整了人口统计学和合并症。结果:跌倒导致了94%的痴呆患者的创伤性损伤,而在农业损伤和痴呆患者中仅占35%。第1组和第2组经历了更广泛的伤害机制,包括机动车交通、运输和环境事件。与3组相比,1组发生重大损伤和接受ICU/外科护理的可能性更高。第1组和第2组的损伤严重程度基本相似。结论:这项横断面研究提供了暗示性证据,表明老年痴呆和农业损伤患者的预后比非农业环境的老年人更严重。未来的研究应该更深入地探索这一群体,以及对农业社区痴呆症护理人员的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书