Physical fitness of industrial firefighters

Firefighting is widely known to be one of the most physically demanding civilian occupations. A subset of this is Industrial Firefighting, which places similarly high physical demands on Industrial Firefighters. Although there are some studies on community firefighters, literature is scant on Industrial Firefighters and their physical fitness. ^ A cross-sectional study of Industrial Firefighters in Petrochemical companies in Texas was carried out in 1996–98 to assess their physical fitness and to develop a set of physical agility criteria useful in their selection and ongoing fitness for duty evaluations. ^ A physical agility criteria and a fitness scorecard was developed based on seven parameters (resting heart rate, diastolic blood pressure, aerobic capacity, muscle strength, muscle endurance, trunk flexibility and total body fat) of musculoskeletal and cardiorespiratory fitness. Each indicator received a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 20 points, based on individual performance. Therefore a minimum and maximum achievable score for the entire battery of tests was 0 and 140 respectively. Of the 111 study subjects, 5 (4.5%) were far above average, 31 (28%) above average, 46 (41.5 %) average, 29 (26%) below average and 0 (0%) far below average as deemed by the physical fitness scorecard. The mean score was 77 (±23) with a minimum and maximum score of 35 and 135 respectively. ^ Following univariate analysis an exploratory factor analysis to group variables and to assess the overall role of constituent variables in total fitness of a firefighter was developed. This was followed by a stepwise linear regression analysis using aerobic capacity as a dependent variable. ^ Finally, a graded implementation strategy was devised, such that all existing Industrial Firefighters would have an opportunity to improve or maintain their physical fitness at or above average level as deemed by the fitness scorecard. ^

Use of universal precautions in the workplace: A comparison of two fire /EMS services

The Health Belief Model (HBM) provided the theoretical framework for examining Universal Precautions (UP) compliance factors by Firefighter, EMTs and Paramedics (prehospital care providers). A convenient sample of prehospital care providers (n = 4000) from two cities (Houston and Washington DC), were surveyed to explore the factors related to their decision to comply with Universal Precautions. Eight hundred and sixty-five useable questionnaires were analyzed. The responders were primarily male (95.7%) eight hundred and twenty-eight and thirty-seven were female, prehospital based (100%), EMTs (60.0%) and paramedics (12.8%) who had a mean 13 years of prehospital care experience. ^ Linear regression was used to evaluate the four hypotheses. The first hypothesis evaluating perceived susceptibility and seriousness with reported UP use was statistically significant (p = < .05). Perceived susceptibility, when considered independently, did not make a significant contribution (t = −4.2852; p = 0.0000) to the stated use of Universal precautions. The hypothesis is not supported as stated. The data indicates the opposite effect. Supported is the premise that as perceived susceptibility and perceived seriousness increase the use of Universal Precautions decreases. Hypothesis two tested perceived benefits with internal and external barriers. Both perceived benefits and internal and external barriers as well as the overall regression were significant (F = 112.6, p = 0.0000). The contribution of internal and external barriers was statistically significant (t = 0.0175; p = 0.0000) and (t = 0.0128; p = 0.0000). Hypothesis three which tested modifying factors, cues to action, select demographic variables, and the main effects of the HBM with self reported UP compliance overall was significant. The variables gender, birth, education, job type, EMS certification, years of service, years of experience providing patient care, Universal Precautions training hours, type of apparatus assigned to and the number of EMS related incidents responded to in a month were found to have a significant contribution to the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ The additive effects were tested by use of a stepwise regression that assessed the contribution of each of the significant variables. Three variables in the equation were statistically significant. Internal barriers (t = −8.5507; p = 0.0000), external barriers (t = −6.2862; p = 0.000) and job type 2 & 3. Job type two (t = −2.8464; p = 0.0045 is titled Engineer/Operator. Job type three (t = −2.5730; p = 0.0103) is titled captain. The overall regression was significant (F = 24.06; p = 0.000). The Hypothesis is supported in the certain demographic variables do influence the stated use of Universal precautions and that as internal and external barriers are decreased, there is an increase in the stated use of Universal Precautions. ^ In summary, this study demonstrated that internal and external barriers have a significant impact on the stated use of Universal Precautions. Internal barriers are those factors within the individual that require an internal change (i.e., forgetfulness, freedom, perception of the urgency of the patient's needs etc.) and external barriers are things in the environment that can be altered (i.e., equipment design, availability of equipment, ease of use). These two model variables explained 23%–30% of the variance. ^