Diving and hyperbaric medicine · 2023
Determining best practice for technical assessment of hookah surface supply diving equipment during diving fatality investigation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Meehan Darren, Smart David, Lippmann John
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to develop a standard process and checklist for technical investigation of hookah diving equipment and apply it to Tasmanian hookah fatality investigations from the last 25 years.
METHODS: A literature search was undertaken to identify technical reports and equipment investigations associated with diving accidents. The information was assimilated to create a process and checklist for specifically assessing the hookah apparatus. The checklist was then applied in a gap analysis of Tasmanian hookah diving fatality technical reports from 1995 to 2019.
RESULTS: As no papers specifically describing technical evaluation of hookah equipment were identified, references evaluating scuba equipment were used to create a hookah technical assessment process incorporating unique features of the hookah. Features included: owner responsibility for air quality; maintenance, function; exhaust proximity to air intake; reservoir volume; output non-return valves; line pressure; sufficiency of supply; entanglement; hose severance risk; gas supply failure and hosing attachment to the diver. Seven hookah diving deaths occurred in Tasmania (1995-2019) of which three had documented technical assessment. Gap analysis identified inconsistent structure between reports with variability in the case descriptors. Missing technical data included: overview of the hookah systems; accessories; weights; how the apparatus was worn by the diver; compressor suitability; assessment of hookah function; breathing gas output and exhaust position relative to air intake.
CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated a need to standardise technical reporting of hookah equipment after diving accidents. The checklist generated may serve as a resource for future hookah assessments and inform strategies for preventing future hookah accidents.
METHODS: A literature search was undertaken to identify technical reports and equipment investigations associated with diving accidents. The information was assimilated to create a process and checklist for specifically assessing the hookah apparatus. The checklist was then applied in a gap analysis of Tasmanian hookah diving fatality technical reports from 1995 to 2019.
RESULTS: As no papers specifically describing technical evaluation of hookah equipment were identified, references evaluating scuba equipment were used to create a hookah technical assessment process incorporating unique features of the hookah. Features included: owner responsibility for air quality; maintenance, function; exhaust proximity to air intake; reservoir volume; output non-return valves; line pressure; sufficiency of supply; entanglement; hose severance risk; gas supply failure and hosing attachment to the diver. Seven hookah diving deaths occurred in Tasmania (1995-2019) of which three had documented technical assessment. Gap analysis identified inconsistent structure between reports with variability in the case descriptors. Missing technical data included: overview of the hookah systems; accessories; weights; how the apparatus was worn by the diver; compressor suitability; assessment of hookah function; breathing gas output and exhaust position relative to air intake.
CONCLUSIONS: The study demonstrated a need to standardise technical reporting of hookah equipment after diving accidents. The checklist generated may serve as a resource for future hookah assessments and inform strategies for preventing future hookah accidents.