This blog series has been written to provide guidance on how DEUS Rescue approaches safety and rescue training. This approach is built around six distinctly different but inter-related areas: Decision-making, Concepts, Skills, Repetition, Testing and Re-certification. Each of these steps contributes to the student not only knowing and understanding products and how to use them, but ensures that he or she is actually capable of using them in an emergency situation, when tension is high and conditions are less than ideal.

Missed our previous entries in this series on The Effective Training Program?

• Read Part 1 – Introduction
• Read Part 2 – Decision-Making and Concepts
• Read Part 3 – Skills and Repetition

In our last entry, we addressed skills and repetition. Skills refers to developing the competencies necessary to do the job – to use equipment properly, and to implement particular techniques, to undertake a rescue or escape. Repetition is a matter of practice, practice, practice to take learned skills to the point of automatic responses so they can be done essentially without thought. This is important given the stress of a real emergency situation.

For our fourth and final entry in this series, we will address two aspects of training that are about verification of results. That is, they are designed to help you, the trainer, understand how well the student has learned what you have been training and continues to maintain the knowledge and skills. Let’s look at Testing and Re-Certification…

Testing

Testing is what closes the teaching-and-learning loop. Testing is proof that lessons were learned and skills acquired (and, perhaps, to what extent). It is about demonstrating the skills and knowledge. But while most testing situations are about the student demonstrating this to the instructor, DEUS takes a slightly different approach.

The DEUS testing process uses a system of checks-and-balances – called a “two initial” approach – to establish proof of competence and confidence. Training is broken down into logical blocks and requires a “two initial” agreement – one from the instructor and one from the student – before moving on from one block to the next.

The trainer “initials” a block as completed only when the student can demonstrate that he or she has achieved a satisfactory understanding and skill level for that block. And, when students are confident that they have learned the block and can repeat it on their own, then the student can “initial” the block as completed. It is only when a block has the initials of both trainer and student that it is truly considered “completed.”

The DEUS “two initials” process assures effective training. Trainers cannot rush through training and assume students learned all that is needed. Classes cannot be run by demonstrating a technique with one student while the rest watch. Trainers have to verify, with each individual student, that students have learned both the concepts and the techniques. Students do not add their signatures until they agree that they understand and have the necessary skills to work safely and do what is necessary in an emergency to save lives.

Re-certification

Safety skills are like riding a bicycle. Once you know how, it only takes a short ride every year to keep the skill. But, let years go by without riding and skills get rusty. Skills to effectively balance, corner, avoid obstacles and brake can all deteriorate. That’s how people get hurt. Re-certification is about revisiting and ensuring that knowledge and skills are maintained year after year.

There is another important reason to re-certify. Both preventive and contingent safety techniques and equipment evolve and can improve over time. Regular re-certification keeps you up to date on the latest and best gear and techniques.

DEUS certifications are good for one year and annual re-certification is required. Re-certification isn’t necessarily difficult, but it does require proving competence.

DEUS Rescue is not a training company. However, we are in the safety and rescue business, and we do understand the importance of effective training in this world. We also understand that safety managers and their organizations have multiple goals and multiple demands on time, money and other resources. That’s why we work with our customers to develop cost-effective train-the-trainer programs so their people can use DEUS controlled descent devices, kits and accessories effectively. For more information, contact us.

This series on training hopes to answer the following question: what makes for the most effective safety and rescue training? As we introduced in the first entry, at DEUS Rescue we have an approach to training that is built around six distinctly different but inter-related areas: Decision-making, Concepts, Skills, Repetition, Testing and Recertification.

Missed our previous entries in this series on The Effective Training Program?

• Read Part 1 – Introduction

• Read Part 2 – Decision-Making and Concepts

In our last entry, we addressed decision-making and concepts. Decision-making is about working to avoid injury through preventive action, and being prepared to act with contingent actions when something goes wrong. They represent the mental aspect of our training – the “what” we want you to learn.

Now let’s look at Skills and Repetition in training – the “how” of our training. Here we address the best methods for ensuring that the methods and approaches to rescue and escape are truly learned. These two aspects of our training approach are closely related, as you’ll see…

Skills

Getting your hands dirty “on ropes” is the best way to develop the physical skills to safely perform escape and rescue techniques. Talking about it and watching videos – basically, using a classroom and lecture approach – is no substitute for the real thing when lives are at stake. Using sandbags or dummies is not truly effective either. DEUS training includes lots of hands-on time performing specific escape and rescue techniques.

With hands-on training, we aim to build fundamental skills so they become second nature. During emergency situations, two attributes become the enemy: panic and acting too slowly. Practice and confidence are the antidotes. Confidence is the result of really knowing what to do rather than wondering if you can do something, and practice is the best way to really know.

A few actual escape and rescue skills can be learned with sandbags or dummies, but not many. The only way to know that you can slither over the edge of a wind turbine with a rope is to do it. The worst time to discover that you don’t have that skill is when the turbine you’re working on catches fire.

For some techniques, there is simply no way to demonstrate or learn the skill with sandbags or dummies. Absolutely the only way to learn the skill is to do it yourself. An example is evacuation from a “floating edge” using an anchor that is at the level of your feet. Sound difficult? That because it is – but you can learn it through effective training and practice.

So ultimately, learning skills – whether they are fundamental or advanced – is ultimately about practice. The goal with practice is to turn new skills into learned behavior. The key is practicing the particular maneuvers or techniques over and over again. In other words – the key is repetition.

Repetition

You’ve heard the old joke – what’s the best way to get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice, practice!

No one learns to play the piano by listening to a lecture or watching YouTube videos. Are escape and rescue techniques like playing the piano? Absolutely!

If you expect to do things quickly and without mistakes, you have to learn the skills taking the same approach as a pianist…or a golfer learning to hit the good shots out of the sand…or the marksman hitting the target. Any skill is learned through good old fashioned practice. That means doing it over and over again until you know it, and then continuing to do it over and over again until it is second nature.

Repetition builds muscle memory (as well as confidence), which is the basis of a behavior or task being “second nature.” In emergencies, muscle memory allows you to get past the nerves, heavy breathing, elevated heart rate and the harsh conditions of fire, smoke and height. It allows you to do complex tasks correctly and quickly because you do not have to stop and think things through. You can just act.

Fortunately, at DEUS, we also design our controlled descent devices to be simple to operate, even under the stress and harsh conditions of emergency use. This way the behavior learned through repetitive training is simple, which also helps reduce the risk of mistakes and slow movement during rescue.

In our next and final entry in this series we will address the “insurance policy” aspects of our training approach - Testing and Recertification. These steps help to ensure that the training actually produced the result sought – a skilled worker.

This series on training hopes to answer the following question: what makes for the most effective safety and rescue training?
As we introduced in the last entry, we take a particular approach to training at DEUS Rescue. This approach is built around six distinctly different but inter-related areas: Decision-making, Concepts, Skills, Repetition, Testing and Recertification.

Let’s take a look at two of these areas – decision-making and concepts.

Decision-making

There are two ways to think about safety: 1) Preventive actions that design the potential for injury out of the job, and 2) Contingent actions that minimize injuries if something goes wrong.

Of the two, “prevention” is preferred over “contingent.” Preventive actions require training to ensure those action steps are conditioned and automatic, and completed effectively. Before a job starts, and while work is being done, how do we do a “continuous safety analysis” to prevent incidents and injuries? How do you conduct an instantaneous risk assessment to make the best possible decision to save a buddy’s life, or your own life? 

Of course, we can’t be assured that prevention will always be effective. As a result, contingent plans are required. Contingent plans, and the techniques to execute them, require training too. In case of an emergency that requires putting into effect a “contingent” plan, what equipment and which techniques should be used?

Concepts

DEUS training is about understanding concepts and then putting those concepts into action. So, we teach the concepts of rescue and rescue equipment – in other words, we want students to understand the big picture of what they’re ultimately hoping to accomplish in a rescue situation, and how the tools can help them accomplish it.

To this end, we teach the differences between “escape” and “rescue.” We help people learn how each individual piece of safety equipment works, what it is good for and what other uses the gear may have. We also seek to explain the pros and cons of particular techniques, in addition to teaching how to implement them.

We will continue this series in the next entry, next week, when we discuss Skills and Repetition.

We like to believe that our equipment is the best in the world. We work hard to design, engineer, source and produce the very finest controlled descent devices, ropes, accessories and kits for safe, simple and reliable evacuation, self-rescue, assisted rescue, work and play.

But the equipment is only half the story. The value of any equipment, no matter how great it is, and regardless of how simple it may be to operate, depends in great measure on the competency of the person using it. This is especially true in harsh environments and in the stress and heat of an emergency.

In other words, is the user well trained? Safety training is intended to make proper care and use of equipment almost second nature, because adrenaline, nerves, injury and other forces at work during an emergency situation often impact thinking and recall. So the best training is that which makes deploying, rigging and executing techniques with a range of equipment a conditioned response.

Given this, one has to ask: what makes for the most effective safety and rescue training?

At DEUS Rescue, we take a particular approach to training. Our approach seeks to achieve the ultimate goal of maintaining a safe and effective work and rescue situation by developing safety and emergency decision-making skills. It helps ensure that people who use our equipment understand both equipment and techniques. It also ensures that students acquire both skills and muscle memory – that ability to physically do something almost without thinking. Finally, our approach is also designed to provide demonstrated proof that the student has been effectively trained.

So what is this approach? It’s built around six distinctly different but inter-related areas:

1. Decision-making
2. Concepts
3. Skills
4. Repetition
5. Testing
6. Recertification

In this blog series, we will walk through our approach to training, and we will address each of these areas in detail. Check back next week for part two.

As we turn the page on the calendar to 2012, it's time once again to make our New Year's Resolutions. So, here we go....

At DEUS Rescue, we resolve to work harder to make 2012 safe and prosperous for you and your businesses and departments.

We will work with our customers in every market, including the fire service, military, law enforcement, wind power, industrial safety, challenge course operations and more, so they can do their jobs with greater safety, and with greater efficiency. We will do this by continuing to develop new, innovative descent devices, accessories and tools that help make rescue and rigging easier and safer. We will make it our mission to assemble complete kits for safe, reliable escape, self-rescue, assisted rescue and work at height. We will provide effective - and cost-effective - training and support so their employees are prepared and knowledgeable in using our equipment properly, especially during emergency situations. And we will strive to exceed your expectations in every aspect of our business, including our products, our service and our expertise so your rescue and safety plans are easier and more effective, so your staff is safer and more productive.

In other words, we will continue to do what we always do.

Happy New Year.

On December 15, the US Occupation of Iraq officially ended. In 2011, we saw the deaths of Osama Bin Laden, Kim Jong-iL and Muammar Gaddafi.

But this should hardly suggest that the world is at peace. Throughout the World, conflicts rage on. Throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and the Middle East, as well as South and Central America, many people woke up this Christmas morning to something all too familiar – the sounds and stresses of war.

This morning, more than 1.5 billion people, or about one-quarter of the entire world population, are living below the international poverty line. More than 900 million people will wake up hungry.

Today, about 450 million people wake up suffering from a mental illness in both developed and developing countries. Roughly 210,000 people will die from a drug-related cause.

Sobering facts on this Christmas morning.

Christmas is indeed a day to celebrate, and to join together with family and friends, to eat, drink and be merry.

It is also a day to appreciate our freedom, health and safety…and to remember those who may not be able to. 

Today, this Christmas Day, we pause to think of those in need throughout the world. And we remember those who worked in 2011 to help others in need – the men and women of the armed forces, the police, the fire service, plus industrial safety professionals…in other words, our customers.

Let’s also give special consideration to those who gave the ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty. Our Happy Holiday is possible only because of the efforts of people who risk everything for the health and safety of others.

Thank you…and Merry Christmas.

Many companies do their escape and rescue training with sandbags or similar inanimate objects rather than real people. The argument for using sandbags instead of people is simple: Why put people at risk if you don’t have to?

Those with safety plans built exclusively on “assisted rescue” argue that “sandbag rescues” are all that is needed because you can always assume that the people you are rescuing are unresponsive, which means they act like sandbags.

The problem with this logic is that it assumes that “assisted rescue” is the only option. It’s not. In fact, in many cases, it is also not the best option.

Often, assisted rescues are slow and the “last man down” doesn’t have anyone to assist him. The best example to illustrate this is if a fire starts in the nacelle of a wind turbine. In case of fire, you have seconds, not minutes, to get out and down. In these circumstances, waiting for help to perform an “assisted rescue” can result in lost lives.

“Wait a minute,” you say, “our wind turbine technicians have the equipment to self-rescue in case of fire.” Yes, they do. Wind turbine technicians work in pairs. The rescue of the first person down can be done as an “assisted rescue.” What about the second person? The second person doesn't have anyone to assist him. Instead, he has to perform an “escape” all by himself. Unless you have actually done an “escape” in training, you will be slow to do it in an emergency. This delay can result in injury or death.

There is another problem with a safety plan built entirely around “assisted rescue.” Equipment designed purely for “assisted rescue” may not be appropriate for “escape.” The only safe way to perform an escape is to descend with your controlled descent device. That way, if a knot or kink in the rope gets sucked into the descent device, you have access to the device to fix the problem. Some descent devices used for rescue are designed to be attached in fixed position to an anchor so that you descend away from it during an escape. If a knot or kink in the rope gets sucked into the device during descent, you may be stuck. If fire reaches the rope you are hanging from before help can rig an alternate way to get you down, an unpleasant outcome is assured.

In your work, what is more likely? Is it a person falling who needs to be rescued where there is plenty of time to perform an “assisted rescue?” Or, is it a time-critical event like a fire that requires getting everyone out and down in a hurry? If time-critical emergencies are more likely in your work, training with people rather than sandbags will develop the skills necessary to get everyone out and down quickly enough to save lives.

What about the argument that training with sandbags avoids putting people at risk during training? At DEUS Rescue, we train with back-up belay using the DEUS 7300 back-up belay system. It works automatically, it does not require an operator to decide when to activate the system or to control descent, it is speed limited to protect from free-fall, and it uses beefy 12 mm rope. When the DEUS 7300 is used for back-up belay during training two things happen. First, no one gets hurt. Second, people learn the skills to keep themselves safe.

By reducing the risk of people getting hurt during training to virtually zero, training with people instead of sandbags increases safety.

In this blog series, we consider the benefits of self-rescue compared with team assisted rescue for professionals who work at height. The bottom line is worker safety, but there are many factors to consider when deciding which approach is better.

In the previous entry, we looked at equipment needs, worker aptitude and risk of further injury for each of these two approaches. Here, we will conclude our assessment with a review of the costs and responsibility implications of both approaches.

Costs: The direct cost to support a self-rescue plan is higher compared with a team assisted rescue approach. There’s more equipment to purchase and more training to provide. But such an approach may also reduce injuries that can occur while a fallen worker is waiting to be rescued. That means lower medical costs, less time off work, and higher overall productivity.

Responsibility: By making each worker responsible for his or her own rescue, those workers are more likely to pay attention during training, take better care of the equipment compared to shared team rescue gear, and ensure that the equipment is with them at all times.

In the end, there are many advantages and disadvantages to both self-rescue and team assisted rescue approaches.  In truth, the best option for supporting the safety of workers at heights is a safety plan that includes both self-rescue and assisted rescue components. With such a combined approach, evacuation is faster, the risk of suspension trauma is reduced, and minor injuries from falls remain minor injuries. Fewer people are at risk because team assisted rescue is only deployed when needed…but it is available when needed, such as when the fallen worker is injured and incapable of self-rescue.

DEUS Rescue offers the very best equipment available to support personal escape, self-rescue after a fall, and team assisted rescue. Our Tower Escape Kit and Industrial Escape Kit each provide the tools needed for individual workers to bail out of any emergency at height. The DEUS Tower Escape & Rescue Kit, and the DEUS Industrial Escape & Rescue Kit, provides additional tools to support both self-rescue and assisted rescue of others.

In early 2012 we will be introducing a revolutionary new system for work teams – the DEUS Personal Rescue/Team Rescue System which combines a Personal Escape & Self-Rescue Kit for each worker with a single shared Team Assisted Rescue Kit. It’s the best of all worlds.

We will address the type of equipment needed for self-rescue and assisted rescue in a future blog entry, where we will also present the new DEUS Personal Rescue/Team Rescue System in more detail.

In our last blog entry, we presented some of the facts that help define the risk for those who work at heights. We concluded with a question. Which approach is better for protecting worker’s health and safety: enabling each worker to self-rescue, or supporting the team to provide assisted rescue?

As a safety manager, comparing and contrasting the two approaches means considering a number of factors, including the different types of equipment needed, the abilities of individual workers to implement one or the other, the risk of further injury, training needs, costs and individual worker responsibility. In this blog entry, we will review the first four of these relative to each approach.

Equipment Needs: Supporting assisted rescue means there is less equipment to purchase and manage. That’s because team rescue equipment is just that – shared by the team. Self-rescue equipment must be provided to each individual worker. The problem with shared rescue equipment is that someone must be responsible for carrying that kit. Workers may “forget” rescue kits because they are often heavy and cumbersome. And, there’s a risk that the person carrying the team assisted rescue equipment is the one injured.

Aptitude of Workers: Self-rescue may not be an option for some workers, especially those with a larger body type and weight. By the same token, if the rescuer is a relatively small person, providing assisted rescue of a larger co-worker may be difficult, or even impossible.

Risk of Injury: Sharing equipment during an evacuation increases the risk of injury, as it will take longer than if each worker has his or her own equipment. Self-rescue is simply faster than assisted rescue. More time between a fall and getting your feet back on the ground means a higher probability of suspension trauma. Plus, assisted rescue puts additional workers at risk of injury during the rescue.

Training: In any circumstance, a rescue plan requires regular and consistent training so workers are prepared and know what to do when an emergency occurs. With self-rescue as part of that plan, a higher level of training is required compared with team assisted rescue.

In the next blog entry, we will conclude this series on self-rescue vs. team assisted rescue by addressing the final two factors: costs and personal responsibility.

People who work on wind, electrical, utility or other high towers, on bridges, platforms, commercial scaffolding and the like all have one thing in common – a risk of falling every day on the job. Safety professionals recognize the value of fall protection gear and rescue plans to minimize the risk and provide an appropriate response when falls occur. But are current processes and gear sufficient?

In this brief series we’ll review the situation, and consider alternatives. In this first entry, let’s look at how significant the risk is for those who work at height.

The US Department of Labor reported in 2009 that 7 falls per 10,000 full time workers resulted in an average of 14 days away from work for those employees. In 2009, 538 falls were fatal, about the same fatality rate as highway vehicle accidents.

Workers at height are typically supported with fall protection equipment, usually a shock-absorbing lanyard or self-retracting lanyard (SRL) connected to the worker’s harness. But a fall can leave workers suspended by that same lanyard and harness until they are able to get down to the ground. The longer the wait, the longer the risk of serious injury, particularly from suspension trauma.

Formally known as “orthostatic intolerance”, suspension trauma occurs when blood that would normally be moved by muscular contractions ceases moving, pools in the veins and ultimately reduces the level of oxygen reaching the brain. OSHA reported in 2004 that suspension in a fall-arrest device can result in unconsciousness, followed by death, in less than 30 minutes.

Protecting workers from falls is only half the equation. Workers at heights must also be given the tools for rescue after a fall. Given this, which approach is better: enabling each worker to self-rescue, or supporting the team to provide assisted rescue?

We’ll take a look at these alternatives in our next entry.