Precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries – A systematic review

108Citations
Citations of this article
174Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives Precarious employment conditions have become more common in many countries over the last decades, and have been linked to various adverse health outcomes. The objective of this review was to collect and summarize existing scientific research of the relationship between dimensions of precarious employment and the rate of occupational injuries. Methods A protocol was developed in accordance with the PRISMA-P checklist for systematic literature reviews. We searched PubMed, Web of Science and Scopus for articles on observational studies from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand published in peer-reviewed journals 1990-2017. A minimum of two independent reviewers assessed each article with respect to quality and eligibility criteria. Articles of high/ moderate quality meeting all specified inclusion criteria were included in the review. Results The literature search resulted in 471 original titles, of which 17 articles met all the inclusion criteria. The most common exposures were in descending order; temporary employment, multiple jobs, working for a subcontractor at the same worksite/temp agency, part-time, self-employment, hourly pay, union membership, insurance benefits, flexible versus fixed work schedule, wages, job insecurity, work-time control and precarious career trajectories. Ten studies reported a positive association between precarious employment and occupational injuries. Four studies reported a negative association, and three studies did not show any significant association. Conclusions This review supports an association between some of the dimensions of precarious employment and occupational injuries; most notably for multiple jobholders and employees of temp agencies or subcontractors at the same worksite. However, results for temporary employment are inconclusive. There is a need for more prospective studies of high quality, designed to measure effect sizes as well as causality.

Figures

  • Table 1. Side-by-side comparison of three different definitions of Precarious Employment in relation to search string returns
  • Table 2. The identified key words included in the search strings
  • Figure 1. The selection and review process
  • Figure 2. Summary data for each exposure group (with effect estimates and confidence intervals). *= confidence intervals derived from O-value. †= NB: Higher Work time control was associated to a lower risk, as expected.
  • Table 3. Characteristics of included articles. [CI=confidence interval; IRR=incidence rate ratio; OR=odds ratio; RR=rate ratio/risk ratio.]
  • Table 3. Contined. [CI=confidence interval; IRR=incidence rate ratio; OR=odds ratio; RR=rate ratio/risk ratio.]

Cited by Powered by Scopus

191Citations
265Readers
101Citations
144Readers

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Koranyi, I., Jonsson, J., Rönnblad, T., Stockfelt, L., & Bodin, T. (2018). Precarious employment and occupational accidents and injuries – A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health. Nordic Association of Occupational Safety and Health. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3720

Readers over time

‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘25010203040

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 55

57%

Researcher 21

22%

Professor / Associate Prof. 13

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 7

7%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Social Sciences 33

47%

Nursing and Health Professions 15

21%

Medicine and Dentistry 13

19%

Psychology 9

13%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0