Occupational Medicine Advance Access originally published online on May 28, 2008
Occupational Medicine 2008 58(6):400-405; doi:10.1093/occmed/kqn052
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Factors associated with marine injuries during vertical chute evacuation training
1 Maritime Accident Investigation Board (MAIB), Carlton House, Carlton Place, Southampton SO15 2DZ, UK
2 School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, Mary Seacole Building, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK
Background The use of a vertical chute marine evacuation system (MES) is now established on marine vessels; this system has, however, been associated with injuries during training.
Aims To identify risk factors associated with adverse outcomes during vertical chute MES training and to generate hypotheses for research into reducing injuries.
Methods Cross-sectional questionnaire study of a cohort of trainees attending vertical chute MES training courses, at two naval training establishments in 2005. Incident data were also collected from both training establishments and from Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) records.
Results The response rate was 99% (n = 351). Pearson chi square and relative risks (RRs) were calculated for specific outcomes with a number of independent variables. Logistic regression was used to analyse independent variables with a statistically significant (P < 0.05) chi square for the outcome of ‘suffering an injury’ during training. Injury was associated with body mass index denoting ‘overweight’, ‘obese’ or ‘morbidly obese’ with an odds ratio (OR) of 12.7 (95% CI: 2.2-72.7). Participants below the mean height also had increased risk of suffering an injury during training (OR: 4.8; 95% CI: 1.2-18.5). Phobias and apprehension prior to training increased the risk of injury; reporting of ‘some concern over the dark’ was statistically significant (OR: 16.6; 95% CI: 1.6-171.5). Life jacket discomfort was also significantly associated with suffering an injury.
Conclusion Policy implications include alteration of the MES design and management of risk through training and informed decision making for choosing an evacuation system for ships and ferries.
Keywords Occupation; risk; seafarers
Correspondence to: Alexandra Farrow, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, Mary Seacole Building, Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex UB8 3PH, UK. Tel: +44 1895268759; fax: +44 1895269853; e-mail: alexandra.farrow{at}brunel.ac.uk