Occupational Injuries among Latino/a Immigrant Cattle Feedyard Workers in the Central States Region of the United States

Agriculture is a dangerous industry with high rates of occupational injuries. Immigrants comprise the majority of the hired agricultural workforce in the United States, and these workers may be at a higher risk for job-related injuries. This study addressed the frequency, characteristics, and risk factors of occupational injuries among Latino immigrant cattle feedyard workers. Data were collected through structured interviews with Latino immigrant cattle feedyard workers in Kansas and Nebraska (n = 243; 90.9% male). Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to identify risk factors for injury. Nearly three-fourths of participants (71.2%) reported having experienced one or more injuries in the past while working on a cattle feedyard. The most frequent types of reported injuries, including those not requiring medical care, were bruises/contusions (40%), cuts/lacerations (21%), and sprains/strains (12%). These injuries were mainly caused by animals/livestock (33%), chemicals (23%), falls (12%), and tools (9%). Significant risk factors for injury included male gender (OR 5.9), being over age 35 (OR 2.6), working on a large or an extra-large feedyard (OR 5.4), having 11 or more employees on the feedyard (OR 3.6), and working more than eight hours a day (OR 4.7). Having received safety training was also associated with greater risk of injury in a univariable model (OR 2.6). Cattle feedyard workers are at high risk for injury and require more effective preventive measures.

beef feedyards: 2016-2017

This study describes antimicrobial use in 22 U.S. beef feedyards by use of two metrics: milligrams of antimicrobial per kilogram of liveweight sold (mg/kg-LW) and antimicrobial regimens per animal year (Reg/AY). The primary objectives were to determine the feasibility of collecting antimicrobial use data at the level of the production system and to identify factors unique to feedyard systems which may confound interpretation of summarized antimicrobial use measures. Records were accessed directly from feedyards or through a data intermediary and then subjected to a process of standardization and quality assurance. Use is reported at the study level with all individual cattle lots from all feedyards combined, as well as at the feedyard level where values were first calculated for each feedyard and then expressed as means, standard deviations and median values. Use at the study level is first reported by antimicrobial class and then by antimicrobial class within the use categories of in-feed, control of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) and individual animal treatment. Due to wide variations of antimicrobial class within use category, feedyard level antimicrobial use is reported only by antimicrobial class. Use values for medically important and not medically important antimicrobial classes are reported separately. Regimens are described for each antimicrobial class within use category by milligrams per regimen and by timeframe from first to last administration. The authors' selection of measures reported here was driven by a desire to minimize necessary assumptions, resulting in transparent reporting of values which can be directly related back to the factors within feedyard systems which may have influenced calculations. Reporting the number of regimens stratified by antimicrobial class within use category and then describing the characteristics of the reported regimens (milligrams per regimen and timeframe) optimize these objectives for reporting.

Beef Feedyards

The objective of this study was to evaluate agreement between medically important antimicrobial use metrics derived from in-person surveys of feedyard management as opposed to metrics derived from production unit-level antimicrobial use records. Survey respondents were asked to estimate values which would allow calculation of the metrics of regimens per animal year (Reg/AY) and milligrams of antimicrobial per kilogram of liveweight sold (mg/kg-LW). At the study level, values were calculated by antimicrobial class within the use categories of in-feed use, control of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) and individual animal treatment. At the feedyard level, values were calculated by total overall use and total use within use category. Feedyard level correlation coefficients between survey and record values for total use were 0.76 (p = .0004) and 0.73 (p = .0009) for Reg/AY and mg/kg-LW, respectively. Correlation coefficients for use category within metric ranged from 0.25 (p = .3224) to 0.65 (p = .0061). Comparing feedyard level survey and record values for total Reg/AY and mg/kg-LW using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test resulted in p-values (95% CI) of 0.3247 (-1.06, 0.25) and 0.7019 (-14.49, 10.387), respectively. Evaluation of comparative rankings as total use by metric indicated that for Reg/AY, only two of the five top-ranked feedyards were consistent between the two data sources. The relationship for mg/kg-LW demonstrated the lowest two and highest three values were consistent between sources; however, the ranking similarities appear to markedly decline in the middle ranks. This report demonstrates that survey-based antimicrobial use data may closely reflect summary values determined from records across multiple beef feedyards. However, individual feedyard relationships between their record and survey values vary widely and ranking by survey may lead to different conclusions as to highest and lowest use than ranking by data collected from use records.