Abstract
BackgroundResearch on occupational safety of law enforcement officers (LEOs) has primarily focused on fatal assaults. Nonfatal assaults, however, have received little attention. The goal of this study was to describe the situational contexts in which LEOs are assaulted, and compare these contexts and risks between fatal and nonfatal assaults in the U.S. Analyzing both types of assaults provides a more complete understanding of occupational safety and opportunities for intervention.MethodsThis study includes a descriptive epidemiology of fatal and nonfatal assaults of LEOs in the U.S. and a pooled cross-sectional analysis of risk factors contributing to the odds of lethal assault. Data were collected from the Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted database. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize fatal and nonfatal assaults. Odds ratios were generated to understand the odds that an assault would result in a fatality.ResultsBetween 1998 and 2013, there were 791 fatal assaults and 2,022 nonfatal assaults of LEOs. Nearly 60% of primary wounds in fatal assaults were received to the head, neck, or throat while nearly 50% of primary wounds in nonfatal assaults were received to the arms/hands or below the waist. The odds that an assault resulted in a fatality decreased by 57% (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.58) when a LEO was wearing body armor. LEOs experiencing an ambush or unprovoked attack had significantly increased odds of an assault resulting in a fatality (OR 3.27, 95% CI 1.83 to 5.85 and OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.44 to 3.47 respectively). LEOs that were disarmed during an encounter with a suspect had more than 2-fold increased odds of an assault resulting in a fatality (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.38).ConclusionsThere are specific situational and encounter characteristics that influence the lethality of an assault, which suggest strategies for prevention. Mandatory wear policies for the use of body armor could significantly reduce mortality among assaulted LEOs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s40621-016-0094-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
Research on occupational safety of law enforcement officers (LEOs) has primarily focused on fatal assaults
LEOs in the U.S experience a high rate of fatal occupational injuries (14.2/100,000) (Maguire et al 2002). While this overall occupational fatality rate is comparable among other first responder populations (Maguire et al 2002), 2014 data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) shows an overall fatal occupational injury rate for U.S workers of 3.3/100,000 (BLS 2015b)
As part of the Uniform Crime Reporting program, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) generates this database from reports of every line-of-duty fatal assault, and nonfatal assault committed with a firearm or knife/ cutting instrument that result in an injury (FBI 2004)
Summary
Research on occupational safety of law enforcement officers (LEOs) has primarily focused on fatal assaults. Seven of the ten National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s risk factors for workplace violence (including assault) have been identified as pertinent for LEOs in the U.S experience a high rate of fatal occupational injuries (14.2/100,000) (Maguire et al 2002). Prior research shows that when fatal LEO assaults occur, initiating traffic stops, investigating crimes, and interacting with potentially dangerous suspects are among the most common encounters scenarios (Hessl 2003; Tiesman et al 2010). These incidents are more common during arrest situations and disturbance calls (Brandl 1996; Kercher et al 2013; Swedler et al 2014).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
