Microanalysis of Roof Bolter Injuries

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the method and value of through its application to reported personal injuries to roof bolters. The technique involves anaysis of accident narratives in order to classify the reported injuries according to where they occurred in the roof bolter's work cycle. Microadysis allows an investigator to use the narrative descriptions to firame the conditions and situations under which miuers were injured, results which then may be used in annual refksher training to make breakout sessions site and job specific. A combination of microanalysis and work-site observaselected work routines, to calculate new accident indices, to characterize the situations and conditions surrounding the accidents, and to desaibe the causes of many of the accidents in work-related terms. AL~~~~~E,R.C.;K~~~~,MJ.;GRAYSON,R.L:M~CR~ANALYS~SOFROOFBOLTW~~~-WES. Am. WP. EMIIRoN. HYG. 12( 12)851-857; 1597.0 1997 AM. tions of roof bolters was used in this study to classify accidents into SummaryThe objective of a 1983-1990 research project was to examine work-related injuries to miners by focusing on sequences of work activities, thus attempting to identifl specific conditions and situations in which miners were exposed to hazards. One part of the research concentrated on injuries during roof bolting, the most hazardous underground mining job at the time. During the course of the study, the authors developed and applied two methods of analysis: (1) detailed microanalysis of accident data and (2) formalized workplace observations of work procedures. The microanalysis of reportable accidents, when coupled with other observational data, assisted the researchers in identifjmg the situations, conditions, and performance errors that exposed roof bolters to hazards.About 3600 bolting-related accidents (not all were injuries), reported in the West Virginia Safety Information System (WVSIS) between 1983 and 1990, were examined. The analysis showed that 2685 reported personal injury incidents occurred at the face during production processes. In a large number of cases, the analysis identified specific job tasks, as well as the causes of the injuries. The injury incidents were organized according to four roof bolting routines and later analyzed for severity. Results showed that fills of roof material accounted for 40% of the injuries. Of the work routines, drilling bolt holes and h a n h "steels" produced 32% of the injuries, while 25% of them occurred during bolt installation, 23% during tramming and positioning the bolter, and 20% during hce preparation work. The researchers developed specific severity-weighted indices to help determine the risk of injury when roof bolters were performing different tasks during the work cycle.Since microanalyses of injuries revealed different risks for different work routines, detailed results of the microanalyses were used to design countermeasures that addressed deviations fiom desired worker performances and to h e better supervisox-labor interactions in the workplace. Intervention...

An analysis of roof bolter fatalities and injuries in U.S. mining

“…Note that drilling was determined to have a risk index ranking of 4. This is in contrast to other studies that identified drilling as a high priority based on the frequency of injuries (Althouse, Klishis and Grayson, 1997; Burgess-Limerick and Steiner, 2007; Klishis et al, 1993). The inconsistency arises because in the current study the parameters of exposure and time spent on a work activity were used in addition to frequency to calculate a risk index.…”

“…Not much has changed from previous studies: drilling and bolting led the frequency of reported injuries for the period of 1983 through 1990 (Althouse, Klishis and Grayson, 1997), and again in a more recent study of reported injuries for 2004 (Burgess-Limerick and Steiner, 2007). Handling of materials was a category defined by Burgess-Limerick and Steiner (2007), and it had the second highest frequency of occurrence followed by adjusting the TRS.…”

“…We developed a scheme for classifying workers’ activity at the time of the injury based on a review of prior classification schemes (Althouse, Klishis and Grayson, 1997; Burgess-Limerick and Steiner, 2007). The following seven categories were identified: (1) drilling, (2) inserting bolt, (3) tramming, (4) walking and traversing the walk-through area, (5) setting the temporary roof support (TRS), (6) handling materials, and (7) other.…”

“…An analysis of injuries occurring between 1983 and 1990 was conducted by analyzing the narrative descriptions that are part of the MSHA incidents database, and by field observation of work procedures. The highest percentage of injuries, 31.8 percent, was reported for drilling holes, followed by 24.6 percent for installing bolts (Althouse, Klishis and Grayson, 1997). These results are similar to a more recent study of incidents in 2004, where drilling and bolting combined had the highest number of incidents, accounting for 65.9 percent (Burgess-Limerick and Steiner, 2007).…”

Methods for using narrative text from injury reports to identify factors contributing to construction injury

“…Researchers at NIOSH have successfully used narrative fields from both the National Traumatic Occupational Fatalities (NTOF) surveillance system and the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to investigate the etiology of specific types of occupational injury and death, such as forklift rollovers and logging deaths [Stout and Jenkins, 1995;Stout, 1998]. In construction, this technique has been applied to falls from suspension scaffolds, trench cave-ins, falls through skylights and roof openings, roof bolting injuries, and ladder falls [Cohen and Lin, 1991;Althouse et al, 1997;Stout, 1998]. United States Army databases have been used to investigate factors contributing to military drownings [Bell et al, 2001] and injuries involving military transport operators [Lincoln et al, 2004].…”