Templates for handling multi-agency collaboration activities and priorities in mining injury incidents: a Delphi study

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study was from a Swedish perspective to map experts' opinions on theoretical statements of essential collaboration activities for management of mining injury incidents.Design/methodology/approachA Delphi technique was performed, asking opinions from experts in iterative rounds to generate understanding and form consensus on group opinion around multi-agency management. The experts were personnel from emergency medical service, rescue service and mine industry, all with operative command positions.FindingsThree iterative rounds were performed. The first round was conducted as a workshop to collect opinions about the most important multi-agency collaboration activities to optimize victim's outcome from an injury incident in an underground mine. This resulted in 63 statements and additional three were added during the second round. The statements were divided into one trajectory and seventh time phases and comprised, e.g. early alarm routines, support of early life-saving interventions, relevant resources and equipment for the assignment and command and control center and functions with predefined action plans for response. It also comprised shared and communicated decisions about each agency's responsibility and safety. All statements reached consensus among the experts in Round 3.Research limitations/implicationsThe experts included in this study seem to be adequate but there could be other experts and different statements that other researchers might consider.Practical implicationsThese statements could be used to evaluate collaboration in major incidents exercises. The statements can also be quality indicators for reporting results from multi-agency management.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the research field of collaboration and joint practices between and among personnel involved in rescue operations.

Does expert judgement is important in mining industry?: A systematic literature review study

“…Percentage consensus (Gyllencreutz et al,2020) Furthermore, there are various interpretations to determine the consensus on Delphi. Table 6 shows the determination of expert judgement consensus based on the Delphi Technique (quantitative) as suggested by previous scholars.…”