Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6 Table 3 shows that age younger than 30 and elder than 44, female, college educated, unmarried, shorter duration of employment, acute and chronic ward working, and higher level of anxiety seems to be the risk factors of PV, while age younger than 30 and elder than 44, female, unmarried, religious, shorter duration of employment, chronic ward and higher level on anxiety are the risk factors of VA. Due to the small events reported in this study we could not get the adjusted rate ratio (ARR) and only part of the risk factors of BM and SH revealed significant estimate. The young age, female, college educated, unmarried, shorter duration of employment and religious are the risk factors of BM, and female, college educated, shorter duration of employment, acute ward and moderate worry, the risk factors of SH. Table 3. Crude rate ratio (CRR) for each variable in physical violence (PV), verbal abuse (VA), bully/mobbing (BM), sexual harassment (SH), and adjusted rate ratio (ARR), 95% confidence interval (95%CI) in PV and VA by Poisson regression analysis. Variables <30 y/o vs. 30–44 y/o >44 y/o vs. < 30–44 y/o Female vs. male College vs. high school Unmarried vs. married Religious vs. unreligious Short* vs. long duration of employment Acute vs. rehabilitation ward Chronic vs. rehabilitation ward A little worry vs. not at all Moderate worry vs. not at all Very and extreme worry vs. not at all CRR 7.03 2.18 8.58 1.97 8.08 1.19 1.20 8.67 3.74 14.44 19.11 3.22 PV ARR 1.70 12.68 4.48 6.11 6.05 1.55 1.23 7.17 5.42 9.87 16.44 2.61 95%CI 1.17 2.48 7.61 21.12 2.53 7.92 9.30 4.01 4.18 10.38 1.15 2.12 1.32 4.35 3.35 2.69 4.39 0.60 1.18 11.70 8.76 36.23 62.18 11.36 CRR 4.53 4.44 21.98 0.85 6.89 3.22 1.11 1.08 1.80 19.49 13.20 3.63 ARR 1.39 26.58 15.64 4.71 7.92 2.61 1.19 1.60 6.17 5.53 4.95 0.72 VA 95%CI 1.07 1.79 18.73 37.71 9.21 26.84 5.93 3.74 6.05 10.38 2.01 3.39 1.23 1.09 4.44 2.25 1.99 0.27 1.16 2.34 8.67 13.46 12.30 1.93 BM CRR 28.5 0.81 18.92 24.78 35.52 3.46 1.59 * Less than four years of duration of employment. A blank means the sample size is too small to get the meaningful rate ratio. 2817 SH CRR 24.78 24.78 1.11 1.37 52.98 2.72 7.10 9.68 4. Discussion In this study, using an Internet website for cohort members to report workplace violence is a new and good beginning. It is very convenient in Taiwan to use computers so we utilized the computer for reporting the violence. Another benefit of a computer-based reporting system was that the data we collected from computer could be used directly for data analysis, and the coding procedure was unnecessary. Besides, the missing data could be diminished through the computer designation, as we can see that there is no missing data shown in Table 1. It was certainly more effective and accurate than the paper-based data collection [22]. This paper focused on the risk factors of staffs, and found that higher anxiety level, especially the group of a little worry and moderate worry, was the risk factor for most of the violence. This finding corroborated the previous questionnaire survey which showed