Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Equipment Safety”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

Bicycle safety equipment.

It is important for the physician to understand bicycle safety equipment in order to prevent and treat bicycle-related injuries effectively. The physician should understand (1) the basic design and function of bicycles, (2) the relationship of improper bicycle fit to injuries, (3) the potential of the various forms of serious riding and racing for injury, and (4) bicycle safety equipment and the standards involved in its fit, manufacture, and care. A decision to use bicycle safety equipment is a decision to control the risk of injury. Physicians should accept a share of the responsibility for decreasing bicycling-related injuries, because they are viewed by the public as credible sources of information regarding the prevention of accidents and injuries.

Bicycling↗

The protective influence of logger's safety equipment.

The effects of loggers' personal protectors and the safety equipment of chain saws were investigated with a postal questionnaire. The sample included 1,200 loggers. The main purpose of the inquiry was to collect data on accidents and near-accidents; special attention was paid to the role and behavior of protective devices in both accident and near-accident situations. Twenty-seven percent of power saw operators reported incidents (near-accidents) which had occurred within the last year and in which some personal protector or piece of safety equipment had prevented harmful mechanical contact. The workers estimated that the average absence from work due to these reported near-accidents would have been 15 workdays if the injury had not been prevented. Sixty percent of the near-accidents occurred during limbing operations, and 30% during falling. The protective equipment which most often prevented injuries was safety boots, which were followed by the safety helmet and leg protectors. The chain of the saw was stopped by the safety padding of the protective equipment in every other near-accident involving chain saws. The chain was blocked by padding material in every sixth situation . In 10% of the near-accidents, the chain perforated the protective equipment.

Accidents, Occupational↗

[Use of safety equipment among immigrant children in Norway. A comparison with Norwegian children].

Young immigrants aged ten to 17 years who had been living in Norway for one year or more participated in a survey about their use of different kinds of safety equipment. The figures were compared with the corresponding figures for Norwegian children and adolescents. The results showed that the young immigrants used safety equipment to a less extent than the Norwegian youngsters did. Furthermore, the immigrants reduced their use of safety equipment significantly from age 11 to age 15, as did the Norwegians. The amount of time the young immigrants had lived in Norway was significantly, although only slightly associated with use of safety equipment. Also the immigrants' attitude toward the Norwegian way of life was slightly related to whether they used safety equipment or not.

Accidents, Traffic↗

Providing child safety equipment to prevent injuries: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of safety advice and safety equipment in reducing unintentional injuries for families with children aged under 5 years and living in deprived areas. DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 47 general practices in Nottingham. PARTICIPANTS: 3428 families with children under 5. INTERVENTION: A standardised safety consultation and provision of free and fitted stair gates, fire guards, smoke alarms, cupboard locks, and window locks. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were whether a child in the family had at least one injury that required medical attendance and rates of attendance in primary and secondary care and of hospital admission for injury over a two year period. Secondary outcome measures included possession of safety equipment and safety practices. RESULTS: No significant difference was found in the proportion of families in which a child had a medically attended injury (odds ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.50) or in the rates of attendance in secondary care (incidence rate ratio 1.02, 0.90 to 1.13) or admission to hospital (1.02, 0.70 to 1.48). However, children in the intervention arm had a significantly higher attendance rate for injuries in primary care (1.37, 1.11 to 1.70, P = 0.003). At both one and two years' follow up, families in the intervention arm were significantly more likely to have a range of safety practices, but absolute differences in the percentages were relatively small. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention resulted in significant improvements in safety practices for up to two years but did not reduce injuries that necessitated medical attendance. Although equipment was provided and fitted free of charge, the observed changes in safety practices may not have been large enough to affect injury rates.

Accident Prevention↗

Children's safety in the home: parents' possession and perceptions of the importance of safety equipment.

A parental survey was administered by health visitors at the eight-month hearing test in five areas of Nottingham in order to examine possession and perceptions of the importance of safety equipment. The response rate was 82.2%. A sizeable proportion of families were found not to possess items of safety equipment thought to be appropriate for an eight-month-old child. Most items were perceived to be very important with a significant association between perceived importance and possession of equipment (P = 0.008). Perceptions of importance did not vary by socio-demographic variables but families on benefit, single-parent families, non-owner-occupiers and families with only one child possessed significantly fewer items. It is concluded that there is considerable scope for educating parents about safety equipment and that the provision of affordable safety equipment schemes should be considered by agencies implementing The Health of the Nation.

Accidents, Home↗

Maternal and child reports of behavioral compensation in response to safety equipment usage.

OBJECTIVE: To assess maternal and child risk compensation behaviors in response to several commonly used safety measures. METHODS: We administered a previously validated self-report measure of risk tolerance to a total of 151 mothers and their children in grades 3-7. Mothers indicated the level of risk they would permit their child to assume; children were questioned regarding the degree of physical risk they would typically assume while unsupervised by an adult. Participating families were randomly assigned to conditions in which safety equipment either was or was not present during assessments of risk tolerance. RESULTS: Mothers who viewed the stimulus materials depicting the use of safety precautions reported significantly higher levels of tolerance for risky behavior on the part of their children than did mothers who viewed identical materials without the safety precautions. No significant differences in estimated risk taking emerged between children in the two experimental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These data may reveal a compensatory mechanism by which parents escalate their threshold for acceptable risk behavior in the presence of safety precautions for their children. Such tendencies have the potential to offset some of the protection provided by the use of safety equipment.

Adolescent↗

Organizational climate, staffing, and safety equipment as predictors of needlestick injuries and near-misses in hospital nurses.

BACKGROUND: Recently passed federal legislation requires institutions to adopt safety equipment to prevent needlesticks, but there is little empirical evidence of the effectiveness of specific types of safety devices or the contribution of safety devices to reducing needlesticks relative to the contributions of staffing, organizational climate, and clinicians' experience. METHOD: In 1998, 2287 medical-surgical unit nurses in 22 US hospitals were surveyed in regard to staffing and organizational climate in their hospitals and about patient and nurse outcomes, including needlestick injuries. Hospitals provided information about available protective devices at the time of the survey. Relationships between nurse and hospital characteristics and protective equipment and the likelihood of needlestick injuries and near-miss incidents were examined. RESULTS: Poor organizational climate and high workloads were associated with 50% to 2-fold increases in the likelihood of needlestick injuries and near-misses to hospital nurses. Capless-valve secondary intravenous set systems and use of any type of protective equipment for IV starts or blood draws were associated with 20% to 30% lowered risks of both event types. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse staffing and organizational climate are key determinants of needlestick risk and must be considered with the adoption of safety equipment to effectively reduce sharps injuries.

Accidents, Occupational↗

The effects of compliance cost and specific consequence information on the use of safety equipment.

The effects of compliance cost and warning content on the use of protective eyewear by racquetball players were evaluated. Four-hundred-twenty subjects were observed for use of eye protection in a field setting. Results indicate that proximal placement of eyewear and the inclusion of specific consequence warning information increased safety equipment use. Implications of this research for augmenting warning effectiveness and safety are discussed.

Cooperative Behavior↗

Equipment safety and risk management.

This article reviews the history of federal regulations that affect medical imaging, briefly discusses state regulations and outlines quality control requirements for radiographic and fluoroscopic equipment. After completing it, readers will: Know the history of regulations that ensure safety for patients, radiographers and radiologists. Understand the evolution of and reasons for federal and state agencies that oversee imaging department operation. Review the radiographer's routine responsibilities regarding testing and maintenance. Glimpse the overall picture of how different regulations fit into an imaging department's daily operations. Realize the importance of following a regular maintenance and testing schedule for patient safety.

Diagnostic Imaging↗

Anaesthesia equipment safety in Canada: the role of government regulation.

Medical device problems as detected by the Health Protection Branch (HPB) of Health and Welfare Canada were studied in order to examine the frequency and safety priority of problems in the subgroup of anaesthesia devices. Data pertaining to the time period from April 1, 1987 to November 30, 1992 were gathered from the Medical Devices Notification Database and the DAFFY Reporting System. The Medical Devices Notification Database contains all notifications for newly marketed medical devices in Canada and the DAFFY Reporting System keeps record of all submitted problem reports and manufacturer recalls along with their designated safety priority status. When an important safety hazard is associated with a medical device as determined from information submitted to HPB, an Alert-Medical Devices may be issued to inform hospitals and health care professionals of the problem. During the studied time period, the percentages of problem reports and recalls as well as Alerts were compared with the percentage of newly marketed anaesthesia devices. It was found that although only 2.3% of the newly marketed medical devices were classified as anaesthesia devices, 8.6% of all problem reports/recalls and 37.5% of all Alerts originated from the field of anaesthesia devices. Comparison of the percentages of problem reports/recalls (8.6%) and Alerts (37.5%) with the percentage of marketed devices for anaesthesia (2.3%) showed differences (P < 0.05). As well, the percentage of class I priority (the highest safety priority) problem reports/recalls for anaesthesia devices was 10.2% compared with 4.9% for non-anaesthesia devices (P < 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Anesthesiology↗

Diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Safety and dosimetry.

A survey of present opinions on the safety of diagnostic ultrasound applications is presented together with some data on output levels. Physical mechanisms involved in potential adverse effects are described. Labelling requirements of the equipment are defined and specified. These requirements are contained in a recent proposal of the Netherlands' Committee on the Safety of Ultrasound.

Acoustics↗