Orr, Rob Marc

Pope, Rodney R

Rigby, Timothy

Schram, Ben

English

INTRODUCTION: Occupational health and safety incidents, such as ‘hazardous exposures’, ‘near misses’ and ‘dangerous occurrences’, place the safety of military personnel at serious risk. These incidents, which can differ between service type (e.g. full-time and reserve personnel) can serve as a warning to the Australian Army as to where future potential injuries and fatalities may occur if risk management strategies are not implemented.AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate reported incidents in Australian Army personnel and compare differences between full-time (Australian Regular Army [ARA]) and part-time (Army Reserves [ARES] personnel.METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data sourced from the Workplace Health, Safety, Compensation and Reporting (WHSCAR) database. Non-identifiable data spanning the period 1st July 2012 to 30th June 2014 were provided. Data were included in the study if the incident: (a) involved ARA or ARES personnel; (b) occurred when the soldiers were on duty or in training, (c) occurred during service between 01 July 2012 and 30 June 2014. Data were excluded if the incident: a) was an injury or fatality, or b) was to a service animals. The Australian Defence Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol LERP 14-024) and the Bond University Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol RO1927) granted ethics approval for this study.RESULTS: Of the reported 3,791 incidents, 96% involved ARA personnel and 4% ARES personnel. When accounting for population size and days of service the ARA reported 6.18 incidents per 100 soldiers-years of active service and the ARES 3.29 incidents per 100 soldiers-years of active service. Across both populations, the leading activity for which an incident was reported was operations (n=2,096, 99.4%) followed by weapon firing (n=304, 8.0%) and unknown (n=206, 5.4%). In the ARA, 84% of incidents were hazardous exposures (68.2% due to operations), 14% near misses (22.0% due to driving) and 2% dangerous incidents (36.9% due to weapon firing). In the ARES, 55% of incidents were hazardous exposures (30.2% due to unknown causes, 24.4% as a passenger), 38% near misses (45.5% due to driving), and 7% dangerous incidents (41.4% due to weapons firing). The Private / Private equivalent ranks had the higher rate of incidents (37%) across both service types, followed by Corporal / Corporal equivalent ranks (27%).CONCLUSIONS: Apart from exposure reported by ARA personnel due mostly to operations, weapon firing and driving present as leading incidents placing the health and wellbeing of ARA and ARES personnel at risk. Risk mitigation strategies, focussing on operational exposures, weapons firing and driving are recommended to reduce the level of risk and possibly injury, mortality and illness suffered by Australian Army personnel. These strategies should be targeted towards the Private / Private equivalent and Corporal / Corporal equivalent ranks

Bond University Research Portal

Bond UniversityResearch RepositoryThat was close: ‘Near misses’, ‘dangerous occurrences’ and ‘hazardous exposures’ in theAustralian ArmyOrr, Rob Marc; Pope, Rodney R; Rigby, Timothy; Schram, BenPublished: 06/10/2017Document Version:Peer reviewed versionLink to publication in Bond University research repository.Recommended citation(APA):Orr, R. M., Pope, R. R., Rigby, T., & Schram, B. (2017). That was close: ‘Near misses’, ‘dangerous occurrences’and ‘hazardous exposures’ in the Australian Army. Australasian Military Medicine Association (AMMA)Conference 2017, Brisbane, Australia.General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.For more information, or if you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact the Bond University research repositorycoordinator.Download date: 22 Aug 20191,2Robin M Orr, 1,2Rodney Pope & 2Rigby, T. & 1,2Schram, B.1Tactical Research Unit, Bond University, 2 Faculty of Health Sciences and Medicine, Bond UniversityEmail: rorr@bond.edu.auINTRODUCTIONOH&S incidents, such as ‘hazardous exposures’, ‘near misses’ and ‘dangerous occurrences’, place the safety of military personnel at serious risk. These incidents, which can differ between service type (e.g. full-time and reserve personnel) can serve as a warning to the military forces as to where future potential injuries and fatalities may occur if risk management strategies are not implemented. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate reported incidents in Australian Army personnel and examine differences between full-time (Australian Regular Army [ARA]) and part-time (Army Reserves [ARES] personnel. RESULTS•Of the reported 3,791 incidents, 96% involved ARA personnel and 4% ARES personnel. •The ARA reported 6.18 incidents per 100 soldier-years of active service and the ARES 3.29 incidents per 100 soldier-years of active service. •Across both populations, the leading activity for which an incident was reported was operations (n=2,096, 99.4%) followed by weapon firing (n=304, 8.0%) and unknown (n=206, 5.4%). •The leading activities by type are shown in Figures 1 (ARA) and Figure 2 (ARES).METHODS•A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data sourced from the Workplace Health, Safety, Compensation & Reporting (WHSCAR) database. •Non-identifiable data spanning the period 1st July 2012 to 30th June 2014 were provided. •Data were included in the study if the incident: (a) involved ARA or ARES personnel; (b) occurred when the soldiers were on duty or in training, and (c) occurred during service between 01 July 2012 and 30 June 2014. •Data were excluded if the incident: a) was an injury or fatality, or b) was to a service animals. •The Australian Defence Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol LERP 14-024) and the Bond University Human Research Ethics Committee (Protocol RO1927) granted ethics approval for this study.THAT WAS CLOSE: ‘Near misses’, ‘dangerous occurrences’ & ‘hazardous exposures’ in the Australian ArmyDISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONSApart from exposures reported by ARA personnel as being due mostly to operations, weapon firing and driving  presented as the leading cause of incidents. The risk of dangerous exposures and driving related incidents amongst army personnel when in military vehicles is supported by the literature.1,2 Likewise, weapons firing prevalence is a major threat to military personnel safety, with the U.S military finding 33% of battle fatalities and 10% of all injuries were due to weapons firing during the operation Iraqi freedom. 3,4 A potential reason for the difference between ARA and ARES in operations and combat training may be due to ARES personnel being exposed to less chronic military duties and combat training. 5 Previous studies have also shown service ranks to greatly influence the everyday risk faced by army personnel. 6Risk mitigation strategies, focussing on operational exposures, weapons firing and driving are recommended to reduce the level of risk and possibly injury, mortality and illness suffered by Australian Army personnel should be targeted towards the Private (equivalent) / Corporal (equivalent) ranks.REFERENCES1 Bell, N. S.; Amoroso, P. J.; Yore, M. M.; Smith, G. S.; Jones, B. H., Self-reported risk-taking behaviors and hospitalization for motor vehicle injury among active duty army personnel. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2000, 18 (3), 85-95.                              2 Smith, G. S.; Dannenberg, A. L.; Amoroso, P. J., Hospitalization due to injuries in the military: evaluation of current data and recommendations on their use for injury prevention. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2000, 18 (3), 41-53. 2.            3 Plat, M. J.; Frings-Dresen, M. H. W.; Sluiter, J. K., A systematic review of job-specific workers’ health surveillance activities for fire-fighting, ambulance, police and military personnel. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2011, 84 (8), 839-8574 Ryan, M. A.; Smith, T. C.; Smith, B.; Amoroso, P.; Boyko, E. J.; Gray, G. C.; Gackstetter, G. D.; Riddle, J. R.; Wells, T. S.; Gumbs, G., Millennium Cohort: enrollment begins a 21-year contribution to understanding the impact of military service. Journal of clinical epidemiology 2007, 60 (2), 181-191.5 Orr, R.M., Pope, R.P., Knapik J.J.. A physical training framework for reserve personnel: A rationalization and recommendations. Strength & Conditioning Journa 2016, 38: 36-41.6 Lee, C., Socioeconomic background, disease, and mortality among Union Army recruits: Implications for economic and demographic history. Explorations in Economic History 1997, 34 (1), 27-55Figure 1: ARA Incidents and leading activitiesFigure 2: ARES Incidents and leading activities

That was close: ‘Near misses’, ‘dangerous occurrences’ and ‘hazardous exposures’ in the Australian Army

https://pure.bond.edu.au/ws/files/32332094/AMMA_Abstract_1_That_was_close.pdf

That was close: ‘Near misses’, ‘dangerous occurrences’ and ‘hazardous exposures’ in the Australian Army

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Bond University Research Portal