Sinclair, Wade (2014) Independent testing of <Level 50 buoyancy aids for Surf Life Saving Australia. Report. James Cook University, Townsville, QLD, Australia. (Unpublished)

PDF (Confidential Report) Restricted to Repository staff only

Abstract

[Abstract] The results of the current study suggest that an increased density of the salt-water environment appears to have positively aided the buoyancy of participants while somewhat negatively influencing their effort to perform the physical tasks. Based on the results of the current project, a number of recommendations were made to SLSA including: proposing an amendment to the current Australian and International standards governing buoyancy aids; assembling a taskforce to revise evidence and recommend amendments to current buoyancy standard authorities for consideration; continuing to work with manufacturers on PPE suitability design; and revisit fit for purpose assessments.

[Executive Summary] Previous research has identified that current levels of buoyancy as stipulated by ISO standard (ISO 12402) for a Level 50 personal flotation device (35 to 50N) is excessive for the successful completion of fit for purpose lifesaving activities with an acceptable perception of exertion. Currently, non-compliant buoyancy aids (BA) are available on the open market for use in other aquatic activities such as big wave surfing, wake boarding and water-skiing. However, a paucity of evidence for the current minimum buoyancy requirements restricts the ability for policy makers to review existing standards. Forty-two (males = 22, females = 20) active, financial and proficient members of Surf Life Saving Australia (SLSA) affiliated surf lifesaving clubs in the Sydney region volunteered to take part in this study and were pre-screened for any contra-indications to participation. Participants were randomly allocated to each of the ten (10) non-compliant BA and a control condition. All trials were held in Sydney, New South Wales during April with each participant completing as many trials as possible within the allocated time, and ceased activities when physically unable to complete any further tasks due to fatigue or cold and/or upon their choice. Participants completed standard and familiar lifesaving activities commensurate with their previous lifesaving training and standardised assessments including buoyancy assessments as well as physical assessments of swimming and duck diving. All physical tasks were completed as quickly as was comfortable while buoyancy assessments were completed at a comfortable pace by NATA accredited assessors. As per project design, all participants were randomly allocated to a BA or control condition for each of the tasks in accordance with participant's availability and suitable BA fit in lieu of manufacturer's guidelines and specifications. The same researchers assessed BA fit, which was considered suitable if secured firmly around the waist, shoulder straps were not riding high or cutting in under the arm and respiration was not impeded. Buoyancy assessments identified that compared to the fresh-water environment, the salt-water environment resulted in 50% less negative or neutral freeboard results and fewer unsuccessful in-water stability and orientation results. Compared to the fresh-water environment, fewer participants failed to return to the surface in the salt-water environment during the simulated unconscious recovery task whilst the control condition identified most participants as positively buoyant. Participants felt slightly more uncomfortable and experienced greater levels of exertion during the simulated unconscious recovery task in salt-water compared to the fresh-water environment for both positive and negative/neutral freeboard BA. All physical tasks were successfully completed whilst wearing BA that attained either positive freeboard or negative/neutral freeboard. There were minimal differences for time, comfort or perceived exertion during the swimming task between the two aquatic environments. In the fresh-water environment, participants perceived a greater degree of exertion and were more uncomfortable completing the swimming task in BA with positive freeboard. In contrast, duck diving in the salt-water environment resulted in slower completion times and an increased level of exertion. Differences between BA that achieved positive freeboard and those that were negative/neutral indicated an increased buoyancy requirement along with a resultant increased exertion and reduction in comfort for the physical tasks. This difference was most evident during the duck diving task. The results of the current study suggest that an increased density of the salt-water environment appears to have positively aided the buoyancy of participants while somewhat negatively influencing their effort to perform the physical tasks. Based on the results of the current project, a number of recommendations were made to SLSA including: proposing an amendment to the current Australian and International standards governing buoyancy aids; assembling a taskforce to revise evidence and recommend amendments to current buoyancy standard authorities for consideration; continuing to work with manufacturers on PPE suitability design; and revisit fit for purpose assessments.

Item ID:	37458
Item Type:	Report (Report)
Additional Information:	Report submitted to Surf Live Saving Australia July 2014. This report is commercially sensitive and confidential and can not be made available to the public.
Date Deposited:	24 Aug 2015 06:18
FoR Codes:	11 MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES > 1117 Public Health and Health Services > 111705 Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety @ 100%
SEO Codes:	92 HEALTH > 9299 Other Health > 929999 Health not elsewhere classified @ 100%
Downloads:	Total: 6
	More Statistics