I have done many risk assessments in the laboratory where I work but never on first aid provisions. Has anyone prepared a risk assessment on first aid provisions in their workplace? I work in a microbiology laboratory and we have a number of first aid kits situated throughout the laboratory. I think we have too many, and of course its quite expensive to replace products that have gone out of date, so I have decided to do a risk assessment. Any ideas would be welcomed. Thanks Iestyn

As above, http://www.hse.gov.uk/firstaid/legislation.htm

I think the poster is asking about the quantity of consumables and equipment to be supplied, not the number of first aiders. What I have done on site is to look at the suggested quantity of consumables suggested by the HSE for the number of people on site and the hazard level, and then ensured that the aggregate quantity in all the first aid grab bags, boxes and first aid room, comes somewhere near the amount required, and that it is distributed fairly sensibly on site. We have around 45 publicly available first aid boxes each of which is 'adopted' by one of the first aiders, whose job is to look in it every few months to keep it reasonably well stocked (there is a stock list in each). Each first aider has their own grab-bag.

How many persons have you in this area?? And what are your records like with regards to the use of products from the FA boxes, and also the number of items disposed of throughout the year, you can make a judgement on what is required then

http://www.sja.org.uk/sj...id-needs-assessment.aspx this tool used to be much better? hnmnmmmmn

I don't disagree that first aid needs depend on the risks and that therefore a risk assessment is part of the process. But "first aid risk assessment" suggests to me an assessment of the risks arising from first aid (eg blood-borne diseases) - whereas the main requirement is to determine what first aid provisions are needed (hence needs assessment).

For goodness sake Bob, someone who works in a lab wants to review the first aid provision. Ok he may not have used the best terminology but come on.

Does it really matter what it is called as long as it reaches the same conclusions! The law says you must make provisions for First Aid and the ACOP gives your guidance for what maybe included in a first aid kit or amount of first aiders required (guidance not law). So if you choose to reflect this on a form marked First Aid Risk Assessment who really cares as long as it does the job! The HSE? I doubt it, as long as you can show you have complied with the law. How you do that and record that is up to each person or company!

The case of the island in the middle of a Loch in deepest Scotland will show an increased risk because of its location not the provision of first aiders or first aid kit and the likelihood of an incident will raise or lower the risk involved. The fact remains the risk is from the work activity not the provision of first aid be it kit or trained persons. Accurately assessed and available First Aid provision in whatever form that maybe, could potentially reduce the injury from becoming worse, therefore impacting (positively or negatively) on the severity element of the risk analysis. This therefore forms part of the assessment. A lack of first aid provision could be the cause of death. If someone trips, falls, bangs their head and swallows their tongue it will be the lack of Oxygen that kills them not the fall.

Thanks NR without assessing the risk from the potential injuries I still maintain that it is not possible to ensure that your provision is adequate.

Iestyn As a fellow microbiologist I am well aware of the problems you face. Apart from those staff who continue to help themselves remember that staff at the bench, and even some of those in admin and support roles, must cover existing cuts and grazes that in other circumstances we would mostly ignore. That raises the number of consumables that you will need. Now add the frequency and thoroughness of hand (and forearm) washing that may loosen or remove even the best of adhesive dressings. That too raises the number of consumables that you will need. Routine glove use is a contentious issue. For most Class I and II work they are unnecessary but some laboratories have decided on universal glove use at all times. That apart, gloves and adhesive dressings do not go easily together, perhaps necessitating even more frequent dressing change. My labs have a largely unlimited supply, though we do lean on anyone helping themselves to handfuls of plasters for home use. Keep an eye out for abuse, but do consider the needs of staff to cover any wound. Some may recommend keeping early and healing wounds open to assist wound repair but the work will necessitate some cover, either a waterproof dressing or gloves. To promote wound repair, frequent removal of dressings should allow air to the wound, as for regular removal of gloves. Breathable dressings go so far, but when repeatedly wetted with soap and water they do tend to become soggy, while alcohol hand rubs simply loosen the adhesive. You really just can't win. Help staff find the best solution for them, in comfort and convenience, that provides protection of any fresh wound and other damaged skin. The infinite variability suggests that you let staff choose their own solution, with guidance on hand hygiene and safe working at the bench. Any more composite restrictions in supply will cause problems as staff rightly complain about being stuck with a grubby and soggy dressing hanging from their finger. Ian