Rank: Forum user 
|
Dear All
I have been asked a question regarding the above, however its something that I haven't really been involved before so was hoping someone might be able to share their experience.
Original data entry into the HSE index calculator brought up fatigue and risk averages around the HSE's averages as indicated in their user guide. Subsequent playing around with the length and times of shifts has seen a significant drop in the fatigue average (although not necessarily the risk index). The question I have been asked is if this drop/ difference is realistic or can this be expected as senior managment are now questioning whether the calculations are wrong? I haven't put the data in myself but been informed it has been checked.
I have read through the research document which goes hand in hand with the calculator and think I understand how the calculator works and so aware that shift duration and times of day does affect the average. I have also made our people aware that the calculator possibly shouldn't be used as anything more than an indicator to help with the process/ risk assessment and help us identify where the issues are and I think can also be quite subjective too.
Would appreciate any comments regarding the above. The research document also indicates that there may be some guidance regarding high score or threshold scores from the HSE. Does anyone know if this exists and where I can find it.
Many thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Taken from the HSE's report - dont know if this helps explain your scenario:
The outputs from the two indices are on two different scales, and both differ from the scale used in the previous version. The Fatigue Index is now expressed in terms of the average probability, multiplied by 100, of a high score (specifically a value of eight or nine on the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS)), and therefore takes a value between zero and 100. The KSS is a nine-point scale ranging from one (extremely alert) to nine (extremely sleepy – fighting sleep). It has been extensively validated, and high scores are known to be associated with a high frequency of microsleeps1.
The output from the Risk Index represents the relative risk of the occurrence of an incident on a particular shift. As with the Fatigue Index, the risk is averaged over the entire shift. A level of one represents the average risk on a typical two-day, two-night, four-off schedule, involving 12-hour shifts starting at 08:00 and 20:00. A value of two represents a doubling of risk.
It should be noted that there are some large differences in the output from the two indices, and a shift with a high value on one index is not always assigned a high value on the other. This is an inevitable consequence of the different information from which the two indices have been constructed and, in particular, of the differential effect of time of day. Whereas both fatigue and risk are highest on the night shift, the risk of an incident occurring on the afternoon shift is higher than on the morning shift. This contrasts with fatigue which tends to be higher on a morning than on an afternoon shift.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Having used the Fatigue Index on a number of occasions I am starting to think that it is of very limited value to industries outside railways (the industry it was developed for). I think the following guidance taken from HSE briefing note available at http://www.hse.gov.uk/hu...ors/topics/10fatigue.pdf is far more helpful for most situations: • Make sure employees have the opportunity to sleep for at least 8 hours between shifts • Encourage employees to develop good sleeping habits • Restrict night shifts to 4 in a row or to 2 in a row if they are 12 hour shifts • Allow at least 2 days off after nights • Make sure shifts ‘rotate forwards’ - mornings, followed by afternoons followed by nights • Avoid long shifts and too much overtime: aim for less than 50 hours work per week (i.e. comply with the EU Working Hours Directive) • Arrange for quality breaks during the working day • Consider personal preferences – some people are ‘morning people’ some are ‘night people’ (larks/owls) Also, I would add that there are far more risks associated with shift work in addition to fatigue. They include communication and team composition when normal members are absent. There may be some compromise when managing all the risks. • Consider allowing some ‘napping’ at work to restore performance but beware of a person working immediately after a nap – they will be less effective for between 30 minutes and an hour • Arrange for more interesting and varied work to be done at night and at other low points but make sure these are not too demanding or too monotonous/repetitive
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.