Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Safety Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ssci

Personal factors and consequences of electrical occupational accidents in

the primary, secondary and tertiary sectors
Juan Castillo-Rosa, Manuel Suárez-Cebador ⇑, Juan Carlos Rubio-Romero, Jose Antonio Aguado
Universidad de Málaga, E.T.S.I. Industriales, C/Dr. Ortiz Ramos, s/n (Teatinos), 29071 Málaga, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Electrical accidents at work are characterised by the severity of the damage caused. Since the circum-
Received 8 January 2016 stances surrounding this type of accidents can have an impact on their outcome, this study identifies sig-
Received in revised form 16 June 2016 nificant relationships between personal factors and the consequences of these accidents for various
Accepted 22 August 2016
sectors of activity. This study is based on an analysis of dependence relationships in 55 categories clas-
sified into 10 variables associated with 14,022 electrical accidents which occurred in Spain between 2003
and 2012. The results obtained show that the three sectors of activity are impacted differently by elec-
Keywords:
trical accidents for both direct and indirect contact. Likewise, a higher proportion of severe and fatal acci-
Electrical accidents
Primary, secondary and tertiary sectors
dents is confirmed compared to the total number of accidents in the country; this figure is multiplied by
Occupational safety 22 in the case of fatal accidents due to direct electrical contact in the primary sector. The analysis of per-
Personal factors sonal factors identified statistically significant relationships between this type of accident and the work-
Consequences ers’ sex, age, experience, nationality and occupation. These results show that the competent authorities
must promote actions to verify that the installations and equipment used in the workplace comply with
applicable legislation regarding protection against direct and indirect electrical contact. Likewise, it is
necessary to design strategies to provide workers with education and training that is adapted to their per-
sonal and occupational circumstances to protect them against electrical risks.
Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction of fatal accidents due to electrical contact out of all accidents

Electricity is the most commonly used form of energy in the
workplace, and a direct relationship has been found between its
consumption and economic development (Ferguson et al., 2000).
This means every day millions of workers are exposed to the risk
of suffering an accident caused by electrical contact, which is a
major concern (Cawley and Homce, 2006). This concern is present
in working environments in the five continents, not only due to the
high number of electrical accidents suffered by workers on the job
(Jenkins et al., 1993; Kisner and Fosbroke, 1994; Rossignol and
Pineault, 1994; McVittie, 1995; Ore and Casini, 1996; Kisner and
Casini, 1998; Loomis et al., 1999; Robinson et al., 1999; Wang,
1999; Batra and Ioannides, 2001; Cawley and Homce, 2003;
McCann et al., 2003; Janicak, 2008; Chi et al., 2009, 2012), but also
because of their severe consequences (Chen and Fosbroke, 1998;
Suárez-Cebador et al., 2014). An example of the scope and severity
of this type of accidents is evidenced in the study conducted by
Cawley and Brenner (2012), which establishes that the percentage
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jcrosa@uma.es (J. Castillo-Rosa), suarez_c@uma.es (M. Suárez-
Cebador), juro@uma.es (J.C. Rubio-Romero), jaguado@uma.es (J.A. Aguado).
involving electricity is 25 times greater compared to accidents
due to falls, which is considered to be the leading cause of occupa-
tional accidents.
Therefore, in order to more efficiently use the resources avail-
able to fight occupational accidents, it is necessary to establish pri-
orities focused on those scenarios presenting higher prevalence
and/or more severe consequences (Jones et al., 1991; Hinze et al.,
1998; Lin et al., 2008; Chi et al., 2004). Thus, to identify these sce-
narios, a more in-depth analysis is required of the determining fac-
tors that lead to the most accidents.
Various studies show that the human factor as the main cause
of occupational accidents, estimating that between 80% and 90%
of these accidents are due to human error or unsafe behaviours
(Kotzé and Steyn, 2013). This is why the analysis of personal fac-
tors (sex, age, experience, occupation, etc.) of workers involved in
accidents is essential for the study and prevention of occupational
accidents (Chi and Wu, 1997; Seo, 2005; Chau et al., 2007; Liao and
Perng, 2008; Lin et al., 2008; Chi et al., 2009; Kotzé and Steyn,
2013; Koustellis et al., 2013). These personal factors have been
studied in many areas of activity in the primary (Zytoon, 2012;
Campos et al., 2015; Robert et al., 2015), secondary (Cheng et al.,
2010; Fabiano et al., 2010; Kifle et al., 2014) and tertiary sectors

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.021
0925-7535/Ó 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
(Jeong and Shin, 2015; Suárez-Cebador et al., 2015; Fort et al.,
2016).
Regarding the relation between personal factors and injuries in
work environments, different studies show that a link exists
between gender and occupational accidents. For example, males
tend to perform higher risk activities (Lin et al., 2008; Nielsen
et al., 2015; Stergiou-Kita et al., 2015) or being a female could
also have an influence on the outcome of an electrical contact
because women have lower impedance than men (Chatterjee
et al., 1986).
With regard to age, many authors confirm that younger work-
ers, 16–20 years old, were more likely to have accidents than peo-
ple from other age groups. This could be due to lack of
qualifications, low risk perception, mindset or behaviour (Maiti
and Bhattacherjee, 1999; Chau et al., 2007). Of note is an analysis
of 255 electrical fatalities in the construction industry of Taiwan
where 71.4% of these accidents were suffered by workers with less
than 1 year of working experience (Chi et al., 2009).
Conversely, a study by the Electrical Safety Foundation Interna-
tional (ESFI) found that fatal electrical injuries are higher for the
45–54 age group, with a rate of 29.1% (ESFI, 2011). This could be
related to the seniority factor (Chau et al., 2007; Salminen, 2004)
where experienced workers usually deal with more difficult situa-
tions, they can overestimate their abilities (Choudhry and Fang,
2008), fail to follow safety guidelines, make inadequate use of
PPE (Koustellis et al., 2013) or underestimate hazards (Huang
and Hinze, 2003).
Another personal factor such as the nationality of the workers
could also play a role in occupational accidents. Foreign workers
often have precarious jobs (Quinlan et al., 2001; Benavides et al.,
2006; Fabiano et al., 2008), lack of safety training (Chi et al.,
2009; White et al., 2016) or face a language barrier when
given safety instructions or explanations regarding procedures
(Lu et al., 2015).
Finally, the occupation of the working must be also considered
(Nielsen et al., 2015). When it comes to electrical accidents, obvi-
ously electricians show a proportionally higher accident rate than
the average. However, many other occupations are exposed to pos-
sible electrical accidents since most workers need to use electricity
in their daily tasks (Chen and Fosbroke, 1998; Cawley and Brenner,
2012; Suárez-Cebador et al., 2014; Hong, 2015).
Moreover, factors associated with working conditions and envi-
ronment are also considered a critical variable (Williamson et al.,
1996; Melamed et al., 1999; Chi et al., 2004; Tam et al., 2004;
Villanueva and Garcia, 2011), as they also have an effect on the
number of accidents suffered by workers (Xiuwen and Platner,
2004; Hämäläinen et al., 2009). Therefore the specific circum-
stances of the working environment require further research on
the various risks workers are exposed to according to their sector
of activity (Fisher, 1939; Coleman, 1981; Ringen et al., 1995;
Pollack et al., 1996; Williamson et al., 1996; Melamed et al.,
1999; Pollack and Chowdhury, 2001; Haslam et al., 2005). In addi-
tion to this is the change in the employment structure worldwide
due to flows of workers through the various work environments,
modifying the population exposed in each one (Loomis et al.,
1999; ILO, 2013) (see Table 1).
Similarly, it is essential to obtain additional information on the
type of electrical contact since this is the basis for the type of pro-
tection (Casini, 1993; Rossignol and Pineault, 1994). Among the
possible types of electrical contact, there are primarily two. Direct
electrical contact when someone touches a conductor or live ele-
ment under normal circumstances, and indirect electrical contact
which refers to someone touching an exposed conducting element
which is normally not live, but accidentally becomes so, due to
faulty insulation or any other cause. The characteristics and forms
of protection for each type of electrical contact are determined in
287
various international (IEC – International Electrotechnical Com-
mission), European (CENELEC – European Committee for Elec-
trotechnical Standardization, Low Voltage Directive 73/23/EEC –
93/68/EEC) and national standards developed individually in each
country.
This justifies the importance and impact of electrical accidents
in the workplace, as well as the need to continue obtaining rele-
vant information on their causes and circumstances to be able to
control and prevent the risks (Williamson and Feyer, 1998;
McCann et al., 2003; Cawley and Brenner, 2012). Based on all of
the above, this study is specifically aimed at identifying in each
sector of activity (primary, secondary and tertiary) the impact of
different variables associated with personal factors and the conse-
quences of this type of accidents, to be able to determine prevailing
scenarios and circumstances. This information will help workers,
specialists and people responsible for safety to conduct evaluation,
prevention and protection tasks against this type of risks to limit
electrical accidents and their severe consequences.
2. Methodology
2.1. Data
This study is based on an analysis of occupational accidents
with leave from work reported in Spain during the decade span-
ning 2003–2012. The source of this information, provided by the
Ministry of Employment and Social Security, is the occupational
accident reports which must be submitted to the above adminis-
tration through the computer software Delt@ (Electronic Declara-
tion of Worker Accidents). In Spain, the details included in the
occupational accident reports are classified based on the criteria
in Order TAS/2926, dated 21st November 2002 [Ministry of Labour
and Social Affairs]. The purpose of this national rule is to transpose
the guidelines of Directive 89/391/EEC [European Community
Council] in order to enable homogeneous processing, in line with
ESAW (European Statistics on Accidents at Work) coding, of all
data related to occupational accidents in the EU Member States.
When an occupational accident occurs in Spain the business
owner or his legal representative is responsible for reporting it to
the labour authorities. All of the information related to the accident
is provided using a workplace accident notification form based on a
software platform called Delt@. Lack of notification or failure to
report in a timely and complete manner can lead to economic
and/or administrative penalties. As result of this procedure, all of
the accidents in Spain experienced by salaried workers during
the period 2003–2012 have been included in this research. It is
possible that some accidents were not reported and they thus have
not been included in the study analysis. This problem of under-
reporting occurs in Spain (Benavides et al., 2004) as well as in
the rest of the world (Hämäläinen et al., 2006). Another aspect to
consider is the quality and accuracy of the information in the work
accident reports (Salguero-Caparros et al., 2015), which should be
noted as a limitation of this study.
Regarding reporting structure, the information in the occupa-
tional accident reports in Spain covers a total of 123 fields, divided
into seven sections: (I) personal details of injured worker (name,
gender, age, experience, nationality, occupation, etc.), (II) work-
place where worker is registered for Social Security (company,
activity, number of workers, H&S management system, etc.), (III)
place and work site where the accident occurred (city, address,
etc.), (IV) accident details (date, hour, place, circumstances, etc.),
(V) care details (severity, body part injured, etc.), (VI) financial
details (salary, subsidy, etc.), signatures and stamps.
In order to select and classify the cases included in this study
(see Table 2), were filtered and processed the data provided by
288 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297

Table 1
Employment by sector, world and regions (millions) (ILO, 2013).

Region Total (1,000,000) Primary Secondary Tertiary

a a a
2000 2007 2011 2012 2000 2007 2011 2012 2000 2007 2011 2012 2000 2007 2011 2012a
N N N N % % % % % % % % % % % %
World 2611.2 2953.7 3085.6 3127.4 40.5 35.5 33.3 33.5 20.4 22.1 22.6 22.5 39.1 42.4 44.1 44.0
Developed Economies and EU 444.6 474.2 467.5 468.7 5.4 3.9 3.6 3.5 27.3 25.1 22.5 22.6 67.3 70.9 73.8 73.9
Central and SE Europe and CIS 147.3 158.8 164.1 165.9 25.2 18.8 19.8 18.8 25.3 26.3 24.6 27.1 49.6 54.9 55.6 54.1
East Asia 743.2 807.7 825.4 830.2 47.7 38.9 33.4 33.7 23.4 27.2 29.8 29.2 28.9 33.9 36.8 37.1
SE Asia and the Pacific 242.1 274.5 297.5 302.2 49.6 44.2 40.8 41.5 16.4 18.3 19.0 19.0 34.0 37.6 40.2 39.6
South Asia 511.8 599.9 626.3 638.6 59.5 53.1 51.0 50.8 15.6 19.5 21.0 21.0 24.9 27.4 28.1 28.1
Latin America and the 207.5 245.9 266.9 271.9 20.3 17.0 15.8 15.7 21.6 22.5 21.7 21.7 58.0 60.4 62.5 62.6
Caribbean
Middle East 40.7 55.3 62.1 64.0 22.4 19.2 16.4 16.4 24.3 26.0 26.4 26.4 53.3 54.8 57.2 57.2
North Africa 47.2 59.0 64.3 65.6 32.4 30.8 27.2 29.7 19.5 21.2 24.0 22.4 48.1 48.0 48.8 47.9
Sub-Saharan Africa 226.5 278.5 311.2 320.4 66.4 63.1 61.8 62.0 7.9 8.5 8.7 8.7 25.7 28.4 29.5 29.3
a
2012 are preliminary projections.

Table 2
Classification of accidents by deviation, economic sector and degree of injury.

Deviation N Sector N Degree of injury N

Electrical indirect contact 6365 Primary 361 Minor 13,310
Electrical direct contact 7657 Secondary 9069 Severe 554
Tertiary 4592 Fatal 158
Total 14,022 14,022 14,022

the Ministry of Employment and Social Security according to three

criteria:

(a) Sector of activity. According to CNAE (National Classification

of Economic Activities) coding included in section (III),
which identifies in the accident report the economic activity
of the company where the accident occurred, were classified
the activities by their economic sector into: primary, sec-
ondary and tertiary. The CNAE classification is equivalent
to NACE, CIIU and ISIC (United Nations Statistics Division,
2015).
(b) Type of electrical contact. Associated with the variable ‘‘Devi-
ation” included in Section (IV).
(c) Accident severity. Associated with the variable ‘‘Degree of
Injury” included in Section (V). In Spain, occupational health
authorities are required to diagnose with medical criteria
the severity of each accident based on the degree of the
injury.

2.2. Design of the analysis

Similar to other methods applied in studies related to the case

in hand (Cawley and Homce, 2003; Cameron et al., 2008; Camino
et al., 2008; Suárez-Cebador et al., 2015), were designed an analy-
sis focused on classifying electrical accidents occurring in various
economic sectors in order to obtain an overview of the impact of
personal factors and the consequences of this type of accidents at
work. Were analysed the possible relations of dependence between
different variables associated with the electrical accidents studied.
On the one hand, were analysed variables linked to workers’ per-
sonal factors such as sex, age, experience, nationality or occupa-
tion. On the other, were analysed variables linked to the
consequences caused by these accidents, such as severity, type of
damage and body part injured (see Fig. 1). The results of these rela-
tionships allowed us to answer questions such as: Who is more
exposed to risk? and, what are the main consequences of said
risks?
The structure of this analysis covers 55 categories, classified
into 10 variables, grouped into 4 sections, as shown in Table 3.
Fig. 1. Analysis structure grouped by variables associated with the accident.
2.3. Statistical analysis
The statistical analysis conducted was based on proving the
existence of a relationship of dependence between the different
variables associated with the accidents. Were prepared contin-
gency tables with which were calculated the statistical Chi-
squared (v2) value in order to accept or reject the null hypothesis
of independence. This figure associated with a significance level
<0.05 makes it possible to verify, with a 95% confidence level, the
relationship of dependence between the variables analysed. To
facilitate a description of the sample, were added information on
the frequency of the accidents as a percentage of the total of the
variable represented. Furthermore, in the description of the results,
together with the figures for statistically significant frequencies,
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297 289

Table 3 electrical accidents and the specific work activity. This is confirmed
Classification of categories and variables considered. in Table 4 which shows a classification of the accidents studied by
Code Variable Code Variable the economic sector in which they occurred. These results high-
1 DEVIATION G Job type light that the share of electrical accidents due to direct or indirect
A Contact type G1 Directors and managers contact are similar in different sectors: primary sector (Direct Con-
A1 Indirect G2 Specialists and scientific and intellectual
tact: 52.4%; Indirect Contact: 47.6%), secondary sector (Direct Con-
Contact professionals tact: 57.3%; Indirect Contact: 42.7%) and tertiary sector (Direct
A2 Direct Contact G3 Specialist; Support Professionals Contact: 49.5%; Indirect Contact: 50.5%).
Likewise, a preliminary analysis of the severity of electrical acci-
2 SECTOR G4 Accountants, administrative clerks and
dents compared to the total number of accidents occurring during
other office workers
B Economic G5 Workers in catering services, personnel and the study period, evidence their significant impact. Table 4 shows
sector sales the high proportion of severe and fatal accidents, in the total
B1 Primary G6 Skilled workers in agriculture, caused by electrical contact and broken down by sectors of activity,
stockbreeding, forestry and fishing with a notably greater presence in the primary sector.
B2 Secondary G7 Skilled workers in manufacturing and These results also confirm that during the decade studied
construction almost two thirds of the electrical accidents occurred in the sec-
B3 Tertiary G8 Operators of installations and machinery,
and fitters
ondary sector and almost a third, in the tertiary sector. Moreover,
were found that the primary sector has barely been affected by this
3 PERSONAL G9 Elementary occupations. Unskilled workers type of accidents, but if we considered the share of electrical acci-
C Gender 4 CONSEQUENCES dents compared to the total number of accidents in each sector, the
C1 Male H Severity differences are not so great as the proportion is very similar in the
C2 Female H1 Minor primary and the tertiary sector, approximately 1 out of every 1000
accidents. However, in the secondary sector, the share of electrical
D Age H2 Severe
accidents is more than twice that of the other two sectors since 1
D1 <25 years H3 Fatal out of every 419 accidents was due to electrical contact.
D2 25–34 years I Injury type As described in the methodology, to determine the specifics
D3 35–44 years I1 Superficial wounds and injuries associated with electrical occupational accidents in the primary,
D4 45–54 years I2 Bone fractures
D5 55–64 years I3 Dislocations, sprains and twists
secondary and tertiary sectors, were presented the results of the
D6 >65 years I4 Contussions and internal lesions independence test conducted to identify possible relationships
between personal variables and consequences associated with
E Seniority I5 Burns, scalds and freezes the accidents.
E1 <1 year I6 Effects of noise, vibrations and pressure Based on the applied methodology, these relationships refer
E2 1–3 years I7 Effects of extreme temperatures, light and only to associations between the variables considered and not to
radiation
causal inferences.
E3 3–5 years I8 Psychological trauma, traumatic shock
E4 5–10 years I9 Multiple lesions
E5 10–15 years I10 Other specified lesions not included in other 3.1. Personal variables
sections
E6 15–20 years J Body part injured 3.1.1. Sex
E7 >20 years J1 Head The results of the statistical analysis applied to the electrical
accidents in the study showed that there is a statistically signifi-
F Nationality- J2 Neck
continent cant relation of dependence (sig.: 0.000) between worker sex, type
of electrical contact and sector of activity (see Table 5). It was
F1 SPAIN J3 Back
F2 AFRICA J4 Trunk and organs determined that occupational accidents due to electrical contact
F3 AMERICA J5 Upper limbs are suffered primarily by males (88.4%), with an even higher per-
F4 ASIA J6 Lower limbs centage in the case of electrical accidents due to direct contact
F5 EUROPE J7 Whole body or multiple parts (91.2%; csr: 11.4).
without Spain In addition, when considering the variable associated with the
F6 NOT SPECIFIED J8 Hand sector of activity where the accident took place, were found that
J9 Foot the prevalence of electrical accidents suffered by males is greater
J10 Other in the case of activities in the primary sector (93.1%; csr: 2.8)
and the secondary sector (96.2%; csr: 38.9). Nonetheless, it is nota-
ble that in the tertiary sector the frequency of this type of accidents
were showed corrected standardised residuals (csr) with the in females reaches 27.4% (csr: 40.5), almost four times more than
understanding that, for a confidence level of 95% or 99%, absolute in the primary sector and seven times more than in the secondary
values above 1.96 or 2.58 confirm beyond chance the impact of sector. This situation is even more marked in indirect contact acci-
the categories considered on the relationship of dependence of dents, with a frequency equal to 31.7% (csr: 28.2).
the variables analysed.
To process and analyse the data we used SPSS (Statistical Pack-
age for the Social Sciences V.18). 3.1.2. Age
The Age variable also showed statistically significant relations
associated with the type of electrical accident and sector of activity
3. Results (see Table 6). The results show there is a gradual reduction in the
frequency in this type of accidents as age rises. This trend is broken
The need to use electrical power in any work environment in the case of workers under 25 and over 65, the latter showing a
means most workers are exposed to this type of accidents. sharp increase in the frequency of electrical accidents due to direct
Nonetheless, an association does exist between the prevalence of contact (13.4%; csr: 11.5).
290 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297

Table 4
Severity of electrical accidents versus total accidents by economic sector in Spain (2003–2012).

Sector Severity Total accidents Electrical accidents Indirect contact Direct contact
v : 105.57
2
d.f.: 4 sig: 0.000 v : 62.51
2
d.f.: 4 sig: 0.000 v2: 47.59 d.f.: 4 sig: 0.000
N % (A) N % (B) B/A N % (C) C/A N % (D) D/A
Global Minor 8,391,030 98.78 13,310 94.92 0.96 6143 96.51 0.98 7167 93.60 0.95
Severe 93,105 1.10 554 3.95 3.60 191 3.00 2.74 363 4.74 4.33
Fatal 10,605 0.12 158 1.13 9.03 31 0.49 3.90 127 1.66 13.29
Primary Minor 399,977 97.90 321 88.92 0.91 157 91.28 0.93 164 86.77 0.89
Severe 7624 1.87 25b 6.93 3.71 10a 5.81 3.12 15a 7.94 4.25
Fatal 962 0.24 15b 4.16 17.65 5b 2.91 12.35 10b 5.29 22.47
Secondary Minor 3,751,614 98.70 8525 94.00 0.95 3705 95.61 0.97 4820 92.80 0.94
Severe 44,519 1.17 431b 4.75 4.06 152b 3.92 3.35 279b 5.37 4.59
Fatal 4751 0.12 113 1.25 9.97 18 0.46 3.72 95 1.83 14.63
Tertiary Minor 4,239,439 98.93 4464b 97.21 0.98 2281b 98.40 0.99 2183b 96.00 0.97
Severe 40,962 0.96 98 2.13 2.23 29 1.25 1.31 69 3.03 3.17
Fatal 4892 0.11 30 0.65 5.72 8 0.35 3.02 22 0.97 8.47

N: number of accidents; A: % total accidents; B: % electrical accidents; C: % accidents by indirect contact; D: % accidents by direct contact.
a
CSR > 1.96.
b
CSR > 2.58.

Table 5
Electrical accidents by gender, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).

Table 6
Electrical accidents by age, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
Considering the variable associated with the sector of activity
(see Table 6), it should be noted that in all categories over half of
the electrical accidents take place in the 25–44 age group. Like-
wise, the results highlight that the distribution of accidents in
the various age ranges in the secondary and tertiary sectors have
similar frequencies. However, the primary sector shows the great-
est differences, with a striking lower prevalence among the young-
est workers.
3.1.3. Seniority
The most significant aspect of the experience variable was that
almost half of the electrical accidents occurred among workers
with less than one year of experience, with a higher prevalence
in the case of direct contacts (see Table 7). As for the variable asso-
ciated with the economic sector, the greatest frequency of all cat-
egories is seen in the workers of the tertiary sector with less than
one year of experience. This was even higher in the case of indirect
contacts (48.7%; csr: 4.1). Also, it is notable that in the primary sec-
tor there is a higher prevalence in the groups of more experienced
workers (E5, E6, E7).
3.1.4. Nationality
In the analysis carried out of worker nationalities and type of
electrical contact, results show that among foreign workers, elec-
trical accidents are primarily suffered in all categories by workers
from the Americas, followed by European, African and Asian work-
ers. Nonetheless, it should be noted that the analysis of the total
number of electrical accidents did not find a statistically significant
relationship (see Table 8). However, when taking into account the
variable associated with the sector of activity, were did find statis-
tically significant relationships in the analysis of all the electrical
accidents and in the case of indirect contacts.
In these analyses, results show how in proportion, the primary
sector presents higher shares of electrical accidents suffered by for-
eign workers. Specifically, this sector shows statistical significance
in the groups of workers from Africa (4.7%; csr: 2.5). This statistical
significance is maintained in the case of electrical accidents due to
indirect contact, with percentages going up to 5.8%. But even more
Table 7
Electrical accidents by seniority, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).
291
notable is the high percentage of accidents due to indirect electri-
cal contact among workers from the Americas in the primary sec-
tor, reaching a frequency of 9.3% (csr: 3.1).
3.1.5. Job type
The results for job type show there is also a relationship of
dependence between the type of job and the type of electrical acci-
dent (see Table 9). Were found that 85% of this type of accidents
takes place in three categories: artisans and qualified workers in
manufacturing and construction (G7), operators of installations
and machinery-fitters (G8) and elementary jobs-unskilled workers
(G9). Furthermore, among these three groups, the frequency is
higher in direct contact in category G7 and in the case of indirect
contact, categories G8 and G9 are the ones with the highest
frequencies.
Adding the variable associated with the sector of activity to the
previous analysis also provided statistically significant results
(Table 9). These results show a strong relationship between three
job type categories and each one of the three sectors. Thus, cate-
gory G6 (31.3%; csr: 55.6) is strongly associated with the primary
sector, category G7 (64.1%; csr: 45.6) to the secondary sector and
category G5 (22%; csr: 45.3) to the tertiary sector. These results
are to be expected given the characteristics of the job type classi-
fication proposed by CNO-11 (INE, 2014a). However, this analysis
has found other significant results including the high frequency
of electrical accidents due to indirect contact suffered by unskilled
workers (G9) in the primary sector (36.6%; csr: 4.9) and the tertiary
sector (30.6%; csr: 13.3). Also, although with a low frequency, were
would like to highlight indirect contact accidents suffered by direc-
tors and managers (G1) in the primary sector (2.9%; csr: 4.2) since
they are almost 9 times greater compared to the secondary sector
and almost 4 times that found in the tertiary sector.
3.2. Consequences
3.2.1. Severity
The data on the severity of the damages caused by the electrical
accidents (see Table 10) confirmed that the consequences of this
292 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297

Table 8
Electrical accidents by nationality, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).

Table 9
Electrical accidents by job type, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).

type of accidents are considered primarily minor. Nonetheless,
results show direct contacts have a higher prevalence in the case
of severe (4.7%; csr: 5.3) and fatal accidents (1.7%; csr: 6.5).
There was statistical significance in severe and fatal accidents
occurring in the primary and secondary sectors when considering
the variable associated with the economic sector (see Table 10).
The analysis shows comparatively that severe accidents in the pri-
mary sector (6.9%; csr: 2.9) are nearly 1.5 times greater than in the
secondary sector (4.8%; csr: 6.6) and over 3 times higher compared
to the tertiary sector (2.1%; csr: 7.7). This situation is even more
dramatic when considering fatal accidents, since in this case the
frequency in the primary sector (4.2%; csr: 5.5) is multiplied by
more than 3 compared to the secondary sector (1.2%; csr: 1.8)
and by more than 6 compared to the tertiary sector (0.7%; csr:
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
Table 10
Electrical accidents by severity, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).
3.7). Furthermore, in fatal accidents due to indirect contact, the
frequency in the primary sector (2.9%; csr: 4.6) is more than 6
times greater than in the secondary sector and more than 8 times
higher than in the tertiary sector. The primary sector also stands
out for electrical accidents due to direct contact with severe conse-
quences (7.9%; csr: 2.1) and fatal ones (5.3%; csr: 4) with even
higher frequencies than for indirect contacts.
3.2.2. Injury type
In the analysis of the injury type variable, were found that most
of the electrical accidents in this study caused, on the one hand,
burns (I5), mostly in the case of direct contacts (39.3%; csr:
17.7); and on the other, superficial wounds and lesions (I1), mostly
in the case of indirect contacts (34.7%; csr: 6.8). In addition, when
considering the variable associated with the economic sector (see
Table 11), were found that burns (I5) occur in more than one in
every three cases in the primary and secondary sectors, and in
one out of every four, in the tertiary sector. This is more marked
in the case of direct contact accidents, with over 40% of the cases
in the primary and secondary sectors and 33% in the tertiary sector.
The analysis also shows other significant results related to the
type of damage caused by electrical accidents in each sector.
Among them, the primary sector (5.3%; csr: 3.5) and the tertiary
sector (3.2%; csr: 3.8) show a higher than expected frequency of
bone fractures (I2) caused by blows or falls following electrical
contact. This type of injuries are mainly present in the primary sec-
tor when the accident is due to indirect contact (7%; csr: 2.9) and in
the tertiary sector when the accident is due to direct contact (3%;
csr: 5). In the tertiary sector there are also dislocations, twists
and sprains (I3) caused by electrical accidents (16.5%; csr: 16.7),
both in indirect contacts (21.8%; csr: 11.2), and direct contacts
(11.2%; csr: 11.1).
3.2.3. Body part
The study on the part of the body injured as a consequence of
the electrical accidents analysed found that most of them (29.4%)
caused damages to the hands (J8), the head (J1) (23.8%) and the
upper limbs (J5) (15.6%) (see Table 12).
Taking into account the variable associated with the economic
sector, were also confirmed that in all sectors the highest preva-
lence was in injuries to hands (J8) both for direct and indirect con-
tacts. However, in the case of injuries to hands, statistically
significant relationships were only found in indirect contacts in
the secondary sector (26.8%; csr: 3.4) and in direct contacts in
the tertiary sector (34.4%; csr: 2).
293
Moreover, when each sector was analysed individually, were
found that in the primary sector there is a significant relationship
between the frequency of accidents affecting the whole body
(15.8%; csr: 4.2) with a greater stress in the case of indirect con-
tacts (17.4%; csr: 4.4). Regarding the secondary sector, the most
notable is the frequency of electrical accidents causing injuries to
the head, both for indirect contacts (27.5%; csr: 12) and direct con-
tacts (28.9%; csr: 11.5). And in the tertiary sector, it is notable that
there are significant relationships between the injuries caused in
various categories such as neck (J2), back (J3), upper limbs (J5)
and lower limbs (J6).
4. Discussion
Based on these results, efforts to reduce electrical accidents at
work should be considered a priority in any workplace in the pri-
mary, secondary or tertiary sector (Hämäläinen et al., 2006). This
is supported both by the high number of accidents occurring
(Cawley and Homce, 2003), and the greater severity of the injuries
suffered by workers since there was a proportionally high level of
severe and fatal cases (Chen and Fosbroke, 1998; Chi et al., 2009;
Cawley and Brenner, 2012).
Also confirmed, and in line with other studies, is that the higher
prevalence of this type of accidents occurs in the secondary sector,
which could be explained by a higher presence of this risk in the
work environment (Janicak, 2008; Chi et al., 2009; Unsar and Sut,
2009; López-Arquillos et al., 2012; Suárez-Cebador et al., 2014).
However, the results also evidence the importance that these acci-
dents are gaining in the tertiary sector due to the rise in the num-
ber of cases. The lower incidence rate and severity of accidents in
the tertiary sector means there are no studies explaining them,
however, we could assume that the increase in the number of cases
in the tertiary sector is due to the growth in the exposed popula-
tion in this sector in developed countries (ILO, 2013). This is the
case of countries such as Spain, essentially focused on activities
in the services sector, where over half of the occupational acci-
dents, and a third of electrical accidents, take place. Were also
found that the severity of the electrical accidents is much greater
in activities in the primary sector. Although in the case at hand
the number of electrical accidents is low, the high proportion of
severe or fatal accidents should be sufficient to justify their inter-
est. Furthermore, the particular circumstances in each country or
region should be taken into account, since the distribution and
evolution of the labour market affects the prevalence of electrical
accidents in each sector of activity (OECD, 2010; ILO, 2013).
294 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
Table 11
Electrical accidents by injury type, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).
With relation to the deviation associated with this type of acci-
dents and coinciding with other studies (Rossignol and Pineault,
1994; Cawley and Homce, 2006), were found that electrical acci-
dents caused by direct contact show in all sectors a higher propor-
tion of severe or fatal accidents than those caused by indirect
contact. Likewise, the number of accidents due to direct or indirect
contact are equivalent in the primary and the tertiary sectors, how-
ever, in the secondary sector there are more direct contacts (Unsar
and Sut, 2009). It is worth highlighting that this type of accidents
occur without distinction and equally in the different sectors when
applicable legislation on electrical equipment and installations
includes protection procedures and mechanisms against electrical
risk due to direct or indirect contacts. This is why we should ask
whether this type of accidents occur due to human error, which
would require promoting education and training for workers; or
due to the safety conditions of the equipment and the installations,
which would require promoting supervision and control plans
(Cawley and Brenner, 2013).
As for the prevalence of the type of injuries and part of the body
injured by this type of accidents, were found that the most com-
mon are burns and essentially in the hands, although in the sec-
ondary sector there is a strikingly high number of accidents
causing head injuries (Unsar and Sut, 2009). Certainly, adequate
selection and use of personal protective equipment (gloves, hard
hats and protective masks) would improve prevention of injuries
for the workers exposed (Akbar-Khanzadeh et al., 1995; Doan
et al., 2004).
Regarding the relation of personal factors with this type of acci-
dents, were determined that they are suffered mostly by males
(88.4%), although in the tertiary sector females account for almost
a third of this type of accidents. Were also found that as the age of
workers increased, the prevalence of this type of accidents
dropped, except in the group aged over 65, where the trend breaks
and the frequency rises once more. This situation is described in
other accident studies, explained by the so-called misjudgement
of hazards and diminished physical capacity (Slovic, 1987; López
et al., 2008). Likewise, were found that in the primary sector there
is a lower prevalence of accidents suffered by younger workers,
which is explained in countries such as Spain by the shift in the
labour force towards activities in the tertiary sector (INE, 2014b).
Moreover, as explained in other research (Horwitz and McCall,
2004), most of the accidents analysed were suffered by less expe-
rienced workers, and in this study, almost half of the accidents
were suffered by workers with less than one year of experience.
This could be explained by lack of training and/or skills for the safe
use of electrical equipment and installations. Another distinguish-
ing factor in the prevalence of electrical accidents is worker nation-
ality (López-Jacob et al., 2008; Papadopoulos et al., 2010). Were
found that nearly 13% of this type of accidents are suffered by
immigrant workers. Among them we should highlight those occur-
ring in the primary sector since the frequency of accidents due to
indirect contact among foreign workers reached 23.8%. In this case,
there seems to be an even clearer need to develop supervision and
training and education plans adapted to this type of workers.
Finally, with regard to the type of job, were found that in the sec-
ondary sector, 82% of the electrical accidents were suffered by
qualified workers and operators of installations and machinery,
whereas in the primary and tertiary sector accidents suffered by
unskilled workers prevailed at 32.1% and 26.1%, respectively. This
situation is surprising since it is assumed these workers should
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
Table 12
Electrical accidents by body part, economic sector and type of electric contact. Spain (2003–2012).
have enough training and qualifications to use electrical equip-
ment and installations, in accordance with specifications estab-
lished internationally, IEC 61140 (International Electrotechnical
Commission), in Europe, such as CENELEC (European Committee
for Electrotechnical Standardisation or the Low Voltage Directive
73/23/CEE – 93/68/CEE), or at the national level where for example
the Spanish legislation establishes Royal Decree 614/2001 on the
minimum stipulations for health and safety protection of workers
against electrical risks.
5. Conclusions
The results of this study confirm the special significance electri-
cal accidents have in the workplace, since in proportion they pre-
sent a much higher severity when compared to all the accidents
suffered by the target population in this study. This situation is
found in all three sectors of activity: primary, secondary and ter-
tiary, with 7 times more cases with severe consequences and 22
times more fatal ones. Therefore, research on this type of accidents
should be a priority, as well as efforts to ensure workers perform
their jobs in safe working environments in relation to electrical
risk.
It also confirms that the consequences of this type of accidents
are related to and depend on the type of electrical contact, the sec-
tor of activity and personal factors associated with the workers. In
line with the above, the main conclusions to be drawn are the
following:
– The proportion of electrical accidents due to direct (54.6%) and
indirect contact (45.4%) were similar, even when each sector of
activity was analysed individually. These results require that
the competent authorities promote actions to verify that the
295
installations and equipment used in the workplace comply with
applicable legislation regarding protection against direct and
indirect electrical contact.
– As for the sectors of activity, the results show that each one of
them has specific characteristics that require promoting actions
to reduce electrical accidents and their severe consequences. In
the primary sector, although there is a lower number of electri-
cal accidents, there is a higher proportion of severe and fatal
cases, foreseeably due to the lack of resources and adverse envi-
ronment conditions for the use of electricity. The secondary sec-
tor is where the majority of this type of accidents occur,
probably due to the higher presence of risks. And in the tertiary
sector, where there is also a high number of electrical accidents,
the differentiating factor here being the higher number of
exposed workers. Therefore, the interest to continue efforts to
reduce this type of occupational accidents could be justified dif-
ferently in each sector.
– Regarding personal factors, we found that sex, age, experience,
nationality and the type of job are variables affecting electrical
accidents. Consequently, strategies to provide workers with
training and education to protect them against electrical risks
need to be adapted to their personal and occupational circum-
stances. This education and training would refer to the identifi-
cation of risks, work procedures, maintenance of equipment and
installations, use of safety elements (circuit breakers, earthing,
lightning protection, etc.), and the use of personal protective
equipment (gloves, goggles, hard hat, clothing, etc.).
5.1. Impact on industry
Electrical accidents in the workplace force workers, companies
and society in general to assume significant financial and human
296 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
costs. Based on the information derived from the results of this
study, administrations, researchers, specialists and other people
responsible for safety in the workplace will be able to identify vul-
nerable situations or groups of workers. This will allow designing
new measures or strategies based on training, supervision and/or
support plans, inspection of equipment and installations, etc., with
the common objective of reducing this type of accidents and limit-
ing their severe consequences.
5.2. Limitations
This study analyses occupational accidents in the primary, sec-
ondary and tertiary sectors in Spain during the decade spanning
from 2003 to 2012. It is however possible that some accidents were
not reported and they have not thus been included in the study
analysis. It is also possible that data is missing or that association
errors exist in some of the 14,022 occupational accident reports
used in this research. This problem is more common in traditional
and family business or industries (Leigh et al., 2014).
The analysis carried out covers characterisation of electrical
accidents once they have occurred and not the probability of their
occurrence since we do not have segregated data regarding the
population exposed in each category considered. Based on the
methodology applied, the results obtained refer only to associa-
tions between the variables considered and not to causal
inferences.
Finally, the results and conclusions obtained from our study in
Spain may not be comparable to results from other countries in the
world.
References
Akbar-Khanzadeh, F., Bisesi, M.S., Rivas, R.D., 1995. Comfort of personal protective
equipment. Appl. Ergon. 26 (3), 195–198.
Batra, P.E., Ioannides, M.G., 2001. Electric accidents in the production, transmission,
and distribution of electric energy: a review of the literature. Int. J. Occup. Saf.
Ergon. 7 (3), 285–307.
Benavides, F.G., Pérez, G., Martínez, J., Martínez, J.M., Gispert, R., Benach, J., 2004.
Underreporting of fatal occupational injuries in Catalonia (Spain). Occup. Med.
54 (2), 110–114.
Benavides, F.G., Benach, J., Muntaner, C., Delclos, G.L., Catot, N., Amable, M., 2006.
Associations between temporary employment and occupational injury: what
are the mechanisms? Occup. Environ. Med. 63 (6), 416–421.
Cameron, I., Hare, B., Davies, R., 2008. Fatal and major construction accidents: a
comparison between Scotland and the rest of Great Britain. Saf. Sci. 46, 692–
708.
Camino, M.A., Ritzel, D.O., Fontaneda, I., González, O.J., 2008. Construction industry
accidents in Spain. J. Saf. Res. 39 (5), 497–507.
Campos, C., Baptista, J.S., Oliveira, M.J., 2015. Non-fatal accidents at work in the
farming sector—a short review. Occup. Saf. Hyg. II I, 131.
Casini, V.J., 1993. Occupational electrocutions: investigation and prevention. Prof.
Saf., 34–39, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Cawley, J.C., Homce, G.T., 2003. Occupational electrical injuries in the United States,
1992–1998, and recommendations for safety research. J. Saf. Res. 34, 241–248.
Cawley, J.C., Homce, G.T., 2006. Trends in electrical injury, 1992-2002. In: Petroleum
and Chemical Industry Conference, 2006. PCIC’06. Record of Conference Papers-
IEEE Industry Applications Society 53rd Annual. IEEE, pp. 1–14.
Cawley, J.C., Brenner, B.C., 2012. Occupational electrical injuries in the US 2003–
2009. IEEE paper no. ESW-2012-24.
Cawley, J.C., Brenner, B.C., 2013. Analyzing on-the-job electrical injuries: a survey of
selected US occupational electrical injuries from 2003 to 2009. Ind. Appl. Mag.,
IEEE 19 (3), 16–20.
Chau, N., Gauchard, G.C., Dehaene, D., Benamghar, L., Touron, C., Perrin, P.P., Mur, J.
M., 2007. Contributions of occupational hazards and human factors in
occupational injuries and their associations with job, age and type of injuries
in railway workers. Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 80 (6), 517–525.
Chatterjee, I., Wu, D., Gandhi, P., 1986. Human body impedance and threshold
currents for perception and pain for contact hazard analysis in the VLF-MF
band. Biomed. Eng., IEEE Trans. 5, 486–494.
Chen, G.X., Fosbroke, D.E., 1998. Work-related fatal-injury risk of construction
workers by occupation and cause of death. Human Ecol. Risk Assess.: Int. J. 4 (6),
1371–1390.
Cheng, C.W., Leu, S.S., Lin, C.C., Fan, C., 2010. Characteristic analysis of occupational
accidents at small construction enterprises. Saf. Sci. 48 (6), 698–707.
Chi, C.F., Wu, M.L., 1997. Fatal occupational injuries in Taiwan—relationship
between fatality rate and age. Saf. Sci. 27 (1), 1–17.
Chi, C.F., Chang, T.C., Hung, K.H., 2004. Significant industry–source of injury–
accident type for occupational fatalities in Taiwan. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 34 (2), 77–
91.
Chi, C.F., Yang, C.-C., Chen, Z.-L., 2009. In-depth accident analysis of electrical
fatalities in the construction industry. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 39, 635–644.
Chi, C.F., Lin, Y.Y., Ikhwan, M., 2012. Flow diagram analysis of electrical fatalities in
construction industry. Saf. Sci. 50 (5), 1205–1214.
Choudhry, R.M., Fang, D., 2008. Why operatives engage in unsafe work behavior:
investigating factors on construction sites. Saf. Sci. 46 (4), 566–584.
Coleman, P.J., 1981. Epidemiologic principles applied to injury prevention. Scand. J.
Work Environ. Health, 91–96.
Doan, D.R., Floyd, H.L., Neal, T.E., 2004. Comparison of methods for selecting
personal protective equipment for arc flash hazards. Ind. Appl. IEEE Trans. 40
(4), 963–969.
ESFI Electrical Safety Foundation International, 2011. Workplace Electrical Injury
and Fatality Statistics, 2003–2010 <http://www.esfi.org>.
Fabiano, B., Currò, F., Reverberi, A.P., Pastorino, R., 2008. A statistical study on
temporary work and occupational accidents: specific risk factors and risk
management strategies. Saf. Sci. 46 (3), 535–544.
Fabiano, B., Curro, F., Reverberi, A.P., Pastorino, R., 2010. Port safety and the
container revolution: a statistical study on human factor and occupational
accidents over the long period. Saf. Sci. 48 (8), 980–990.
Ferguson, R., Wilkinson, W., Hill, R., 2000. Electricity use and economic
development. Energy Policy 28 (13), 923–934.
Fisher, A.G., 1939. Production, primary, secondary and tertiary. Econ. Record 15 (1),
24–38.
Fort, E., Ndagire, S., Gadegbeku, B., Hours, M., Charbotel, B., 2016. Working
conditions and occupational risk exposure in employees driving for work.
Accid. Anal. Prevent. 89, 118–127.
Haslam, R.A., Hide, S.A., Gibb, A.G.F., Gyi, D.E., Pavitt, T., Atkinson, S., Duff, A.R., 2005.
Contributing factors in construction accidents. Applied Ergonomics, Invited
Paper, Special Edition on Ergonomics in Building and Construction 36 (4), 401–
416.
Hämäläinen, P., Takala, J., Saarela, K.L., 2006. Global estimates of occupational
accidents. Saf. Sci. 44 (2), 137–156.
Hämäläinen, P., LeenaSaarela, K., Takala, J., 2009. Global trend according to
estimated number of occupational accidents and fatal work-related diseases
at region and country level. J. Saf. Res. 40 (2), 125–139.
Hinze, J., Pedersen, C., Fredley, J., 1998. Identifying root causes of construction
injuries. J. Constr. Eng. Manage. 124, 67–71.
Hong, E.H., 2015. A statistical analysis on the electric shocks in 2014. J. Korea Saf.
Manage. Sci. 17 (4), 171–179.
Horwitz, I.B., McCall, B.P., 2004. Disabling and fatal occupational claim rates, risks,
and costs in the Oregon construction industry 1990–1997. J. Occup. Environ.
Hyg. 1 (10), 688–698.
Huang, X.Y., Hinze, J., 2003. Analysis of construction worker fall accidents. J. Constr.
Eng. Manage. – ASCE 129 (3), 262–271.
ILO, 2013. Global employment trends 2013: Recovering from a second jobs dip/
International Labour Office. Geneva. Available in: <http://www.ilo.org/
wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—dcomm/—publ/documents/publication/
wcms_202326.pdf>.
INE, Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Clasificación Nacional de Ocupaciones 2011,
2014a. España. Available in: <http://www.ine.es/jaxi/menu.do?type=pcaxis&
path=/t40/cno11&file=inebase>.
INE, Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Estadística de flujos de población activa,
2014b. España. Available in: <http://www.ine.es/jaxiT3/Tabla.htm?t=8282>.
Janicak, C.A., 2008. Occupational fatalities due to electrocutions in the construction
industry. J. Saf. Res. 39, 617–621.
Jenkins, E.L., Kisner, S.M., Fosbroke, D.E., Layne, L.A., Stout, N.A., Castillo, D.N., et al.,
1993. Fatal injuries to workers in the United States, 1980–1989: a decade of
surveillance, national profile. Cincinnati, OH: DHSS [NIOSH] (publication
number 93–108).
Jeong, B.Y., Shin, D.S., 2015. Characteristics of occupational accidents in Korean,
Chinese, Japanese and Western Cuisine restaurants. Human Fact. Ergon. Manuf.
Serv. Ind..
Jones, J.E., Armstrong, C.W., Woolard, C.D., Miller Jr, G.B., 1991. Fatal occupational
electrical injuries in Virginia. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 33 (1), 57–63.
Kifle, M., Engdaw, D., Alemu, K., Sharma, H.R., Amsalu, S., Feleke, A., Worku, W.,
2014. Work related injuries and associated risk factors among iron and steel
industries workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Saf. Sci. 63, 211–216.
Kisner, S.M., Fosbroke, D.E., 1994. Injury hazards in the construction industry. J.
Occup. Med. 36, 137–143.
Kisner, S., Casini, V., 1998. Epidemiology of Electrocution Fatalities in Worker Death
by Electrocution: A Summary of NIOSH Surveillance and Investigative Findings.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, OH, pp. 9–19.
Kotzé, M., Steyn, L., 2013. The role of psychological factors in workplace safety.
Ergonomics 56 (12), 1928–1939.
Koustellis, J.D., Halevidis, C.D., Polykrati, A.D., Bourkas, P.D., 2013. Analysis of a fatal
electrical injury due to improper switch operation. Saf. Sci. 53, 226–232.
Leigh, J.P., Du, J., McCurdy, S.A., 2014. An estimate of the US government’s
undercount of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses in agriculture. Ann.
Epidemiol. 24 (4), 254–259.
Liao, C.W., Perng, Y.H., 2008. Data mining for occupational injuries in the Taiwan
construction industry. Saf. Sci. 46 (7), 1091–1102.
Lin, Y.H., Chen, C.Y., Luo, J.L., 2008. Gender and age distribution of occupational
fatalities in Taiwan. Accid. Anal. Prev. 40 (4), 1604–1610.
 J. Castillo-Rosa et al. / Safety Science 91 (2017) 286–297
López, M.A.C., Ritzel, D.O., Fontaneda, I., Alcantara, O.J.G., 2008. Construction
industry accidents in Spain. J. Saf. Res. 39 (5), 497–507.
López-Jacob, M., Ahonen, E., García, A.M., Gil, Á., Benavides, F.G., 2008. Comparación
de las lesiones por accidente de trabajo en trabajadores extranjeros y españoles
por actividad económica y comunidad autónoma (España, 2005). Revista
española de salud pública 82 (2), 179–187.
López-Arquillos, A., Rubio-Romero, J.C., Gibb, A., 2012. Analysis of construction
accidents in Spain, 2003–2008. J. Saf. Res. 43 (5), 381–388.
Loomis, D., Dufort, V., Kleckner, R.C., Savitz, D.A., 1999. Fatal occupational injuries
among electric power company workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 35, 302–309.
Lu, L., Shi, L., Han, L., Ling, L., 2015. Individual and organizational factors associated
with the use of personal protective equipment by Chinese migrant workers
exposed to organic solvents. Saf. Sci. 76, 168–174.
Maiti, J., Bhattacherjee, A., 1999. Evaluation of risk of occupational injuries among
underground coal mine workers through multinomial logit analysis. J. Saf. Res.
30 (2), 93–101.
McCann, M., Hunting, L.K., Murawski, J., Chowdhury, R., Welch, L., 2003. Causes of
electrical deaths and injuries among construction workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 43,
398–406.
McVittie, D.J., 1995. Fatalities and serious injuries. Occup. Med.: State Art Rev. 10,
285–293.
Melamed, S., Yekutieli, D., Froom, P., Kristal-Boneh, E., Ribak, J., 1999. Adverse work
and environmental conditions predict occupational injuries. Am. J. Epidemiol.
150, 18–26.
Nielsen, K.J., Hansen, C.D., Bloksgaard, L., Christensen, A.D., Jensen, S.Q., Kyed, M.,
2015. The impact of masculinity on safety oversights, safety priority and safety
violations in two male-dominated occupations. Saf. Sci. 76, 82–89.
OECD, 2010. OECD in Figures. París. Available in: <http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/
statistics>.
Ore, T., Casini, V., 1996. Electrical fatalities among U.S. construction workers. J.
Occup. Environ. Med. 38, 587–592.
Papadopoulos, G., Georgiadou, P., Papazoglou, C., Michaliou, K., 2010. Occupational
and public health and safety in a changing work environment: an integrated
approach for risk assessment and prevention. Saf. Sci. 48 (8), 943–949.
Pollack, E.S., Griffin, M., Ringen, K., Weeks, J., 1996. Fatality in the construction
industry in the United States, 1992 and 1993. Am. J. Ind. Med. 301, 325–
330.
Pollack, E.S., Chowdhury, R.T., 2001. Trends in work-related death and injury
ratesamong U.S. construction workers, 1992–1998. Silver Spring, MD: Center to
Protect Workers’ Rights.
Quinlan, M., Mayhew, C., Bohle, P., 2001. The global expansion of precarious
employment, work disorganization, and consequences for occupational health:
a review of recent research. Int. J. Health Services 31 (2), 335–414.
Ringen, K., Englund, A., Welch, L., Weeks, J.L., Seegal, J.L., 1995. Why construction is
different. Occup. Med. 10 (2), 255–259.
297
Robert, K., Elisabeth, Q., Josef, B., 2015. Analysis of occupational accidents with
agricultural machinery in the period 2008–2010 in Austria. Saf. Sci. 72, 319–
328.
Robinson, C.F., Petersen, M., Palu, S., 1999. Mortality patterns among electrical
workers employed in the U.S. construction industry, 1982–1987. Am. J. Ind.
Med. 36, 630–637.
Rossignol, M., Pineault, M., 1994. Classification of fatal occupational electrocutions.
Can. J. Public Health 85, 322–325.
Salguero-Caparros, F., Suarez-Cebador, M., Rubio-Romero, J.C., 2015. Analysis of
investigation reports on occupational accidents. Saf. Sci. 72, 329–336.
Salminen, S., 2004. Have young workers more injuries than older ones? An
international literature review. J. Saf. Res. 35, 513–521.
Seo, D.C., 2005. An explicative model of unsafe work behavior. Saf. Sci. 43 (3), 187–
211.
Slovic, P., 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236 (4799), 280–285.
Stergiou-Kita, M., Mansfield, E., Bezo, R., Colantonio, A., Garritano, E., Lafrance, M.,
Theberge, N., 2015. Danger zone: men, masculinity and occupational health and
safety in high risk occupations. Saf. Sci. 80, 213–220.
Suárez-Cebador, M., Rubio-Romero, J.C., López-Arquillos, A., 2014. Severity of
electrical accidents in the construction industry in Spain. J. Saf. Res. 48, 63–70.
Suárez-Cebador, M., Rubio-Romero, J.C., Carrillo-Castrillo, J.A., López-Arquillos, A.,
2015. A decade of occupational accidents in Andalusian (Spain) public
universities. Saf. Sci. 80, 23–32.
Tam, C.M., Zeng, S.X., Deng, Z.M., 2004. Identifying elements of poor construction
safety management in China. Saf. Sci. 42 (7), 569–586.
United Nation Statistic Division, 2015. Classifications Registry. Available
correspondences <http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regot.asp?Lg=3>.
Unsar, S., Sut, N., 2009. General assessment of the occupational accidents that
occurred in Turkey between the years 2000 and 2005. Saf. Sci. 47 (5), 614–619.
Villanueva, V., Garcia, A.M., 2011. Individual and occupational factors related to
fatal occupational injuries: a case-control study. Accid. Anal. Prev. 43 (1), 123–
127.
Wang, E., 1999. Mortality among North Carolina construction workers, 1988–1994.
Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 14 (1), 45–58.
White, K.M., Jimmieson, N.L., Obst, P.L., Gee, P., Haneman, L., O’Brien-McInally, B.,
Cockshaw, W., 2016. Identifying safety beliefs among Australian electrical
workers. Saf. Sci. 82, 164–173.
Williamson, A.M., Feyer, A.M., Cairns, D.R., 1996. Industry differences in accident
causation. Saf. Sci. 24 (1), 1–12.
Williamson, A., Feyer, A.-M., 1998. The causes of electrical fatalities at work. J. Saf.
Res. 29, 187–196.
Xiuwen, D., Platner, J.W., 2004. Occupational fatalities of Hispanic construction
workers from 1992 to 2000. Am. J. Ind. Med. 45, 45–54.
Zytoon, M.A., 2012. Occupational injuries and health problems in the Egyptian
Mediterranean fisheries. Saf. Sci. 50 (1), 113–122.