The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
PPE on Vehicle Accidents
I was just wondering what peoples thoughts/department SOG's were on wearing bunker gear, ambulance crew/fire crew, on the scene of vehicle accidents. In my department's SOG's it states "Bunker gear is required for personal injury accidents", yet there are some who refuse to wear it when they respond on the squad(ambulance) because they have reflective vests or jackets. Me personally I wear my bunker gear and a refective vest no matter what truck I respond in.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Tony P on
-
Safety. First, foremost and always.
Correct appropriate PPE for whatever the incident might be. 'Full' structural PPE may not always be the 'appropriate' PPE. Try wearing full structural PPE , and staying safe, at an MVA when it's over 35 degrees C in the shade, and there isn't any shade. (35C is about 95F) Does the phrase 'heat stress' come to mind? Perhaps 'heat exhaustion' even? And what comes after 'heat exhaustion' - 'heat stroke', potentioally fatal? Size up the incident and act accordingly. If your SOP's state 'full structural PPE always', perhaps they shouldn't - someone hasn't thought the matter through properly.
Also remember, the better our PPE is at protecting us from radiant heat, the worse it seems to be at allowing our metabolic heat to dissipate - and that metabolic heat build up can also be fatal! Which takes us to wildfire and the wearing of structural gear- you're better off in jeans and a long-lseeved cotton shirt if you don't have proper wildfire PPE.
Safety. Dynamic Risk Assessment. Those two go together.
-
Permalink Reply by mike carroll on
-
I agree that all F/Fs ad EMSs should always wear the bunker gear while out on the roadway, some people on the roads to-day fail to respond to an incident as they are too wraped up in th ers own small world and sometimes speeding and fail to react. Keep safe and have a good weekend. Mike Carroll, Dublin Auxiliary Fire Service.Dublin.Ireland
-
Permalink Reply by T.J. on
-
every one is in full turnout's and we even keep the ambulance people away tell we've got everything secure and are ready for the backboard
-
Permalink Reply by brenda caldwell on
-
PPE should be wore on every call for your safty and others. We have to have ours on or we do not respond.
-
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on
-
Our SOP is bunker gear and traffic vest (MVA-no fire). Full bunker w/ SCBA, no vest (MVA w/fire). Any personnel not actively fighting the fire will have vests on while on a roadway scene. No extrication gloves except those with moisture barriers (for protection against bloodborne pathogens) are to be worn, (all apparatus with extrication equipment has at least 2 sets).
-
Permalink Reply by jon shackelford on
-
We wear our PPE on all MVA's We also have our people in full PPE take the place of ambulance personal if they are in a vehicle before we arrive. We dont want to get anybody with our department or another hurt
-
-
I'm entering this debate again. The thread title mentions PPE. The original post mentions the wearing of 'bunker gear', which I understand to be a colloquial term for 'structural PPE'. We seem to have most posters adding to the theme of 'PPE at all times', without regard to the type of PPE. So I'll say again, there are different types of PPE which are designed for different types of incident. What we should all be striving for is the wearing of correct appropriate PPE for the incident we're attending.
Heavy, bulky structural PPE may not be appropriate for a non-fire MVA in high ambient temperatures, depending on the task being performed. Structural PPE is not appropriate for trench rescue. Structural PPE is not appropriate for working on a Hazmat incident. Structural PPE is totally inappropriate when working on a wildfire in high ambient temperatures.
Modern structural PPE is designed to protect us from radiant heat, the often extremely high radiant heat found at a structural fire. It is very good at doing this. What it isn't good at is allowing the metabolic heat build up, created by our bodies when we're working, to escape. The seeming lack of knowledge on this aspect of our work that I've found on this and other sites is astounding. If our body heat isn't allowed to disipate, it can kill us. Is that putting it strongly enough? Don't yell BS, don't laugh, it can kill.
I said above the 'seeming' lack of knowledge. There would be many, many people out there who understand what I'm saying, just not many of them post (g'day Ben). If anyone doesn't believe what I've said, do some research, the data is out there. It needs to be understood by us, the people at risk.
Do some research. Think back on how you've felt yourself at certain incidents. Work on getting everyone to understand the concept of correct, appropriate, PPE. "Bunker gear at all times" is not the correct answer.
-
Permalink Reply by Rob Young on
-
Tony,
You make very good points and I agree that there are people who do not understand that bunker gear is not appropriate for every incident. I know I have been at incidents where ambient heat was so high that firefighters were nearly passing out. This heat is extremely dangerous and that is why we tell our guys to strip down if they aren't active in the incident (in rehab.) at the time. Anyone who understands anything about fire fighting should understand this.
The problem lies in the fact that most departments are not just in a situation where they don't have the correct gear; they can't afford the correct gear. Even with grants and no interest loans, most departments feel they have more pressing needs than to have different sets of PPE for different types of incidents. Therefore they go for the most bang for the buck, and in most cases that is Structural PPE. While it's not ideal for many situations outside of structure fires, it is usable for nearly all incidents. There needs to be very close monitoring by officers, and firefighters need to understand their own limits in order to safely use structural PPE in non-structural incidents.
When money is tight, fire departments need to get what they can out of what money they have. However, I agree that in the best of circumstances, bunker gear at all times is not the correct answer.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Dress for the sport you're playing. You don't see the Chinese table tennis team dressing in their shorts and t-shirts and lining up against an NFL team.
There are too many sources of grants, bond issues, public funding campaigns, and even United Way donations for volly departments to not find a way to provide extrication gear. A good extrication coat can run less than $200 each.
There's also the problem with automotive lubricants, fuels, coolants, and corrosives contaminating structural gear and reducing its effectiveness in protecting the members from their next house fire.
You say that some fire departments "can't afford the correct gear". I say that they can't afford NOT to have it. Firefighters lives and health are too important. Using structural gear to protect from glass cuts and metal punctures on a wreck today may weaken the gear to the point that it doesn't protect you very well at the next house fire.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
