Table 4 Association of health sector with the risk of total injuries and MSIs by nursing occupations.

Occupation	Sector	% Of occupation	Injury rate per 100 FTE	Adjusted RR for all‐injuries (95% CIs)*	Adjusted RR for MSIs (95% CIs)*
RNs	Acute care	73.2	21.9	1.00 (ref.)	1.00 (ref.)
	Community care	19.7	7.7	0.38 (0.33 to 0.43)	0.41 (0.31 to 0.55)
				p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001
	Nursing homes	7.1	17.2	0.87 (0.62 to 1.21)	1.30 (0.80 to 2.10)
				0.4046	p  =  0.2897
LPNs†	Acute care	74.5	30.5	1.00 (ref.)	1.00 (ref.)
	Community Care	No data	No data	No data	No data
	Nursing homes	24.6	26.8	0.81 (0.73 to 0.90)	0.81 (0.77 to 0.86)
				p < 0.0001	p < 0.0001
CAs	Acute care	31.0	30.7	1.00 (ref.)	1.00 (ref.)
	Community Care	26.8	25.3	0.80 (0.66 to 0.96)	0.96 (0.87 to 1.06)
				p  =  0.0202	p  =  0.3925
	Nursing homes	42.2	37.0	1.22 (0.92 to 1.63)	1.42 (1.09 to 1.85)
				p  =  0.1686	p  =  0.0086

CA represents care‐aides, nursing assistants, community health workers.

Ref., reference.

RRs, 95% CIs and p values were derived from Poisson regression model with generalised estimating equations.

*Adjusted variables: gender and age; health region were treated as cluster variables in the model.

†LPNs were under‐utilised in community care. There were very few LPNs requested for community care‐posted positions. The combined productive hours in three health regions produced the equivalent of 9 person‐years. This indicates that in community care for LPNs there was only enough time‐at‐risk hours equivalent to a total of nine people across three health regions working full‐time for 1 year. The data are insufficient to make any calculations of relative risk.⁴⁰