Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
APearson  
#1 Posted : 27 May 2020 08:50:08(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
APearson

Good morning all

Has anyone comepleted a Risk Control Mattix for the coronavirus as well as a Risk Assessment.?

Thanks

A Kurdziel  
#2 Posted : 27 May 2020 09:06:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

If you need to do a matrix (I hate the bloody things) you need to look at the hazard (SARS-CoV-2 virus) and the likelihood of the negative event (eg risk of infection) the likelihood is almost entirely dependent on what you are doing, where and involving what people.

So I can’t really provide you with this sort of risk assessment unless I have a context and even then you won’t have ownership of the risk unless you do your own.  

chris.packham  
#3 Posted : 27 May 2020 09:21:53(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
chris.packham

One of the problems you will encounter is trying to assess (quantify?) the probability that in a given environment (assuming that this is stable and not continuously varying) the person at risk will be in contact with the virus in a manner that will result in uptake and infection. Consider all the variables you will encounter. Consider also that the direct route, i.e. direct transmission of the airborne virus so that there is contact with the person whose risk you are assessing, is not the only route. Indeed, it can be argued that the indirect route, i.e. virus live on objects handled, acquired on the hands and transferred to the face where it can be absorbed, is possibly more likely. After all, unless the transmitter actually coughs or sneezes will they render the virus airborne? (So how effective actually is social distancing, one might argue!) Given that according to recent statistics one person in 400 is likely to be an active carrier how likely is it that your person will be within the distance needed for direct transfer of infection?

I am reminded of the saying of that local yokel when asked by a visitor how to find a particular location: "I wouldn't start from here if I were you."

Now get off your soapbox Chris

toe  
#4 Posted : 28 May 2020 20:25:56(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
toe

I agree that Covid-19 must be risk assessed. However, I don’t think it should be assessed in the traditional way of using Likelihood x Severity or risk matrix, it should be conducted as a business risk.

As with all viruses, pathogens, diseases etc. these cannot be immediately detected humanly. So, we cannot assess the likelihood of a person being in contact with the hazard simply because we don’t know where the hazard is. Likewise, once a person has been exposed to the hazards, we cannot evaluate the severity (or consequence) of the hazard to that person, some people may just be a carrier and others have severe consequences. In addition, be cautious of ALARP and assumptions on residual risk, due to the potential severity outcome we must take all precaution to reduce to risk of transmitting the disease. Therefore, using a risk matrix may not be helpful for Covid-19.

Standard Infection Control Precautions (SICP) have been utilised in Health and Social Care for many years for preventing the spread of transmitted infectious agents (known or not). Conventionally, the task would be considered when utilising the precautions, nevertheless, with the current pandemic of Covid-19 every person is at risk, irrespective of the task and therefore all precautions must be taken.

As with business risks, document the risk to the business on your Organisational Risk Register (if applicable) and detail the company’s precaution that will be used to manage the risk, how these will be implemented, and who holds overall responsibility for the implementation. Certifying that all of the control measures are implemented and communicated to the relevant people will ensure that the assessment of this risk is suitable and sufficient. 

thanks 2 users thanked toe for this useful post.
aud on 28/05/2020(UTC), Wailes900134 on 29/05/2020(UTC)
stevedm  
#5 Posted : 29 May 2020 10:10:55(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
stevedm

yes done...I have for years been operating a risk assessment process that looks at controls in place rather than likelihood  (before the tradtionalists start...likehiood is also a consideration)...ranging from High = no controls in place to Low - engineering controls in place...this is just rough converation stuff as it can go into depth behind this is verification that the cintrols are in place...the severity of the outcome really doesn't change...

BernieGale123  
#6 Posted : 02 June 2020 07:34:00(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
BernieGale123

I would be very interested to see a quantative  risk assessment that had a real substance in fact

Look at deaths in Hospitals who are supposed to be the best at infection control. I spent 2 hours looking at staff working in a local hospital 30 feet from a live infection ward for Covid-19. I can honestly say I doubt Covid-19 can be as infectious as we think.

We are all better to concentrate on making staff feel better mentally as the long terms stress is much more likely to be an issue, rather than deciding if you have a high medium or low risk.

.

Users browsing this topic
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.