Industry profile · NAICS 325413

Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing

Workplace injury rates across 232 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

232
Employers
2.0
Avg TCR
3.3
BLS benchmark
3,606
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing average 2.0 recordable injuries per 100 workers, below the BLS national benchmark of 3.3.

2.0
avg TCR · reporting employers
3.3
BLS national benchmark
232
employers reporting
3,606
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing Safety Data Reveals

The Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing sector (NAICS 325413) encompasses 232 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 3,606 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 2.0 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 3.3 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 2.0 is below the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 3 of 5
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
ARDx San Diego Summers Ridge San Diego, CA A 1.4
Quidel Corporation - Manufacturing San Diego, CA A 1.4
Carpinteria Carpinteria, CA A 1.3
Scantibodies Laboratory, Inc Santee, CA A 1.3
Bio-Rad Laboratories-EDx-Ft Worth Ft. Worth, TX A 1.3
Dexcom, Inc San Diego San Diego, CA A 1.3
Advanced Cell Diagnostics Newark, CA A 1.3
Liebel-Flarsheim Company, LLC Raleigh, NC A 1.3
CMI Pomona Pomona, CA A 1.3
Thermo Fisher Scientific Lenexa, KS (MBD) Lenexa, KS A 1.3
Clark Laboratories Inc Jamestown, NY A 1.3
Magellan - Corporate North Billerica, MA A 1.3
Thermo Fisher Scientific (Microgenics) Fremont, CA A 1.2
Surmodics WPS Eden Prairie, MN A 1.2
Grifols Diagnostic Solutions-Emeryville Emeryville, CA A 1.2
Maryland Campus Rockville, MD A 1.2
Roche Molecular Solutions (Warehouse) Branchburg, NJ A 1.2
DiaSorin Inc Stillwater, MN A 1.2
Diagnostics : Beckman Coulter - Sacramento West Sacramento, CA A 1.2
Co1 Med - Centennial Centennial, CO A 1.2
Chembio Diagnostic, inc Medford, NY A 1.2
Meridian Bioscience- Magellan Diagnostics North Billerica, MA A 1.1
Quality Bioresources, Inc Seguin, TX A 1.1
Lonza Rockland, ME A 1.1
Siemens Healthineers Mishawaka, IN A 1.1
Fujirebio Diagnostics Inc., Malvern Malvern, PA A 1.1
Surmodics Eden Prairie, MN A 1.1
Roche Diagnostics Operations Indianapolis, IN A 1.1
QuidelOrtho Rutherford Carlsbad, CA A 1.1
Thermo Fisher Scientific, Eugene, OR Eugene, OR A 1.1
Lonza Walkersville Walkersville, MD A 1.1
3471 Campus (Corporate, MMF, Richards) Cincinnati, OH A 1.1
Diagnostics : Beckman Coulter - Chaska Chaska, MN A 1.0
ARDx Westbrook Westbrook, ME A 1.0
Promega Biosciences LLC San Luis Obispo, CA A 1.0
Leica Biosystems Richmond Richmond, IL A 1.0
Avioq, Inc. Durham, NC A 1.0
Quidel Cardiovascular Inc San Diego, CA A 1.0
Diagnostics : Beckman Coulter - Southfield Southfield, MI A 0.9
Becton Dickinson Caribe LTD Cayey, PR A 0.9
Abcam Waltham Waltham, MA A 0.9
SomaLogic - 2950 Wilderness Place Boulder, CO A 0.9
Access Bio, Inc Somerset, NJ A 0.9
ARDx San Diego Mesa Rim San Diego, CA A 0.9
Immucor Norcross Norcross, GA A 0.9
Meridian Bioscience Inc - Main Cincinnati, OH A 0.9
Newark Site Newark, DE A 0.9
Pleasanton Site Pleasanton, CA A 0.9
Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Systems Baltimore Sparks, MD A 0.9
Promega Corp Madison, WI A 0.9
← Prev Page 3 of 5 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Blood derivative in-vitro diagnostic substances manufacturing?

This sector averages 2.0 against a BLS benchmark of 3.3 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.