Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32555636›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Economic analysis of new workplace technology including productivity and injury: The case of needle-less injection in swine.

Biaka Imeah, Erika Penz, Masud Rana, Catherine Trask, Needle-less Injector Study Team

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Development of a Swine Production Cost Calculation Model.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Biaka ImeahCanadian Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Erika PenzCollege of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2610-8450
Masud RanaCollaborative Program in Biostatistics, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.
Catherine TraskCanadian Centre for Health and Safety in Agriculture, College of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-0799-1735
Needle-less Injector Study Team
University of Saskatchewan · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increasing intensification in swine production has led to new and specialized technologies, but the occupational health and safety impacts are rarely quantified in the business plans for adoption. Needle-less injection has potential to increase productivity and eliminate needle stick injury in workers, but it is not clear whether these benefits offset high capital investment and potential increases in musculoskeletal loads. This economic evaluation employed probabilistic scenario analysis using injury, cost, and production data gathered from interviews with swine producers in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. After adoption of needle-less injection, rates of needle-stick injury went down with no measureable effect on upper limb musculoskeletal disorders, resulting in lower health and safety costs for needle-less injectors. Needle-less injection duration was 40% faster once workers acclimatized, but large start-up costs mean economic benefits are realized only after the first year. The incremental benefit cost ratio promoted adoption of needle-less injectors over conventional needles for the base case of a 1200 sow barn; the conventional method is beneficial for barns with 600 sows or less. Findings indicate that well-designed technologies have the potential to achieve the dual ergonomics goals of enhancing human wellbeing and system performance. We anticipate that the economic and decision models developed in this study can be applied to other new technologies in agriculture and animal production.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryAnimalsCost-Benefit AnalysisEfficiency, OrganizationalHumansInjections, JetManitobaNeedlestick InjuriesOccupational DiseasesOccupational HealthSaskatchewanSus scrofaSwineSwine DiseasesTime FactorsWorkers' Compensation

Identifiers

PMID32555636
PMCPMC7299390
OpenAlexW3035904356

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.