Evaluating the Use of Stretchers in Two Mobile Refuge Alternatives.

John R Heberger, Jonisha P Pollard
{"title":"Evaluating the Use of Stretchers in Two Mobile Refuge Alternatives.","authors":"John R Heberger, Jonisha P Pollard","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In a mine emergency where refuge is necessary, miners may sustain injuries that will render them unable to walk or crawl. In this situation, a miner may have to rely on others for transportation into the mobile refuge alternative (RA) while on a stretcher. Since requirements for mine first-aid stations were developed before RAs, stretchers should be evaluated to determine whether they are usable in an RA and within the physical capabilities of miners in a refuge. The size of the RA airlock is a concern, as it has not been determined if current airlocks will accommodate a miner on a stretcher. This study evaluated the time required to move three types of stretchers into two commercially available RAs. The splint stretcher had the longest average time to move into each RA as compared to the backboard and soft stretcher. This increase was mostly due to the increased time requirements for getting the splint stretcher into the airlock. For all stretchers, it took approximately two to three times longer to enter the inflatable tent-type RA compared to the rigid steel RA. Mining companies should consider how well their current first-aid implements work with their RAs and manufacturers of inflatable RAs should maximize the size of the outer doors leading into the airlock to allow an easier entry for stretchers.</p>","PeriodicalId":91558,"journal":{"name":"Journal of safety, health and environmental research","volume":"12 2","pages":"298-306"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5148155/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of safety, health and environmental research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a mine emergency where refuge is necessary, miners may sustain injuries that will render them unable to walk or crawl. In this situation, a miner may have to rely on others for transportation into the mobile refuge alternative (RA) while on a stretcher. Since requirements for mine first-aid stations were developed before RAs, stretchers should be evaluated to determine whether they are usable in an RA and within the physical capabilities of miners in a refuge. The size of the RA airlock is a concern, as it has not been determined if current airlocks will accommodate a miner on a stretcher. This study evaluated the time required to move three types of stretchers into two commercially available RAs. The splint stretcher had the longest average time to move into each RA as compared to the backboard and soft stretcher. This increase was mostly due to the increased time requirements for getting the splint stretcher into the airlock. For all stretchers, it took approximately two to three times longer to enter the inflatable tent-type RA compared to the rigid steel RA. Mining companies should consider how well their current first-aid implements work with their RAs and manufacturers of inflatable RAs should maximize the size of the outer doors leading into the airlock to allow an easier entry for stretchers.

评估两种移动避难所替代方案中担架的使用情况。
在需要避难的矿井紧急情况下,矿工受伤后可能无法行走或爬行。在这种情况下,矿工可能需要在担架上依靠他人运送进入移动式避难所(RA)。由于矿山急救站的要求是在移动式救生舱之前制定的,因此应评估担架是否可用于移动式救生舱,以及是否符合救生舱内矿工的体能要求。救生舱气闸的大小也是一个值得关注的问题,因为目前的气闸能否容纳担架上的矿工尚未确定。这项研究评估了将三种担架移入两种市售救生舱所需的时间。与背板担架和软担架相比,夹板担架移入每个救生舱所需的平均时间最长。时间增加的主要原因是夹板担架进入气闸所需的时间增加。就所有担架而言,进入充气式帐篷型救生舱所需的时间大约是进入硬质钢救生舱所需的时间的两到三倍。矿业公司应考虑其现有的急救工具与充气式救生舱的配合情况,充气式救生舱的制造商应尽量增大通往气闸的外门尺寸,以方便担架进入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信