Steven A Kahn1, Clint Leonard2, Young Gun Lee3, Rick Boatwright4, Tom Flamm5, Jason Woods6. 1. Division of General Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical University of South Carolina, United States Young Gun Lee's can change to University of South Alabama, United States. Electronic address: skahn@health.southalabama.edu. 2. Vanderbilt School of Nursing, United States. 3. Division of Acute Care Surgery and Burns, Department of Surgery, University of South Alabama Medical Center, United States. 4. Chattanooga Fire Department, United States. 5. International Association of Firefighters Burn Fund, United States. 6. DC Firefighters Burn Foundation, United States.
Abstract
INTRO: There were over 60 firefighter line of duty deaths and roughly 30,000 injuries in the United States in 2016. Modern thermoprotective gear has reduced the risks firefighters face from both thermal and inhalation injury, but must be used properly to be effective. The purpose of this study is to examine gear use and associated injury in firefighters. METHODS: Surveys were distributed with questions about demographics, gear usage, and maintenance practices. If previously injured, firefighters described the injury, treatment, and recovery. RESULTS: Of the 50 surveys distributed, 37 were returned (72%). A majority of respondents (70%) reported wearing incomplete gear. Those who reported injury were more likely to have omitted gear (81% vs 45%). For all respondents, the items most commonly omitted were hood (58%), gloves (22%), and earflaps (22%). Regular cleaning of gear was not practiced by 39% of burned respondents and 46% had not had their gear sized within 2 years. Serious burns were reported by 41% of respondents. Mean burn size was 7% total body surface area (TBSA), and 11% reported self-treating their burns, including 63.5% who continued to work despite suffering a 2nd or 3rd degree burn injury. Only 17% were treated at a burn center, and this group missed anywhere from two shifts to 8 months of work. CONCLUSIONS: Firefighters risk injury by omitting gear and not adhering to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines on gear sizing, maintenance, and station wear. Firefighters also frequently self-treat serious burns despite unique considerations regarding re-injury. National trends related to gear use and injury risk should be studied further, and standards should be developed for ensuring safe return to work.
INTRO: There were over 60 firefighter line of duty deaths and roughly 30,000 injuries in the United States in 2016. Modern thermoprotective gear has reduced the risks firefighters face from both thermal and inhalation injury, but must be used properly to be effective. The purpose of this study is to examine gear use and associated injury in firefighters. METHODS: Surveys were distributed with questions about demographics, gear usage, and maintenance practices. If previously injured, firefighters described the injury, treatment, and recovery. RESULTS: Of the 50 surveys distributed, 37 were returned (72%). A majority of respondents (70%) reported wearing incomplete gear. Those who reported injury were more likely to have omitted gear (81% vs 45%). For all respondents, the items most commonly omitted were hood (58%), gloves (22%), and earflaps (22%). Regular cleaning of gear was not practiced by 39% of burned respondents and 46% had not had their gear sized within 2 years. Serious burns were reported by 41% of respondents. Mean burn size was 7% total body surface area (TBSA), and 11% reported self-treating their burns, including 63.5% who continued to work despite suffering a 2nd or 3rd degree burn injury. Only 17% were treated at a burn center, and this group missed anywhere from two shifts to 8 months of work. CONCLUSIONS: Firefighters risk injury by omitting gear and not adhering to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) guidelines on gear sizing, maintenance, and station wear. Firefighters also frequently self-treat serious burns despite unique considerations regarding re-injury. National trends related to gear use and injury risk should be studied further, and standards should be developed for ensuring safe return to work.