The composition of nosologies and occupational injury risks in officers of the Federal Fire Service of the Ministry of Emergency Situations of Russia (2012–2021).

Relevance. Professional firefighters are exposed to high levels of physical and emotional stress which impacts their functional reserves and makes the susceptible to erroneous actions and occupational traumas. The objective is to assess the decade-long (2012 to 2021) risk of occupational injuries and to establish its correlation with nosologies of external causes under Chapter XIX of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision (ICD-10).
Methods. We analyzed occupational injuries across different categories among Federal Fire Service (FFS) officers of the EMERCOM of Russia (emergency response squads, prevention, technical and administrative workforce), their causes (technical, organizational, psychophysiological and hazardous fire-related factors), and performed occupational activities (firefighting, training, sport or daily activities). Based on the ICD-10, injury risks and exposure of particular body areas to external factors were calculated per 10,000 people according (×10–4).
Results and Discussion. Over a 10 year’s timespan, 1,769 occupational injuries have been registered among Federal Fire Service officers EMERCOM of Russia. The occupational injury rate for firefighters was (9.19 ± 0.54)•10–4 injuries/(person•year), which was statistically significantly lower (p < 0.001) than for male workforce employed in Russian economy sectors – (16.50 ± 1.09)•10–4. The overall average diagnose per injury rate was 1.5, including 1.7 in firefighting and other emergency response activities, 1.4 in combat training activities, and 1.5 in routine activities. The weighted average risk of body injuries was (11.96 ± 0.89)•10–4 injuries/(person•year); in particular, cumulative injury risk rate was (10.01 ± 0.83)•10–4 responsible for 83.6% of the total value, with burns (1.39 ± 0.23)•10–4 (equal to 11.6%), poisoning by combustion products (0.39 ± 0.09)•10–4 (equal to 3.3%), heat fainting (0.18 ± 0.04)•10–4 (equal to 1.5%) respectively. The congruent risk trends for occupational injuries, industrial head and body injuries, including burns, are positive and statistically significant, which suggests the trends are driven by identical (unidirectional) parameters. For determination coefficients of different significance, the polynomial trend of body injuries risk shows a downward trend of data reduction; the risk of burns resembles an inverted U-curve; while the risk of poisoning by combustion products demonstrates an increase in indicator values. Risks of injuries to the head (S00–S09 in ICD-10) showed rank 1 of significance among occupational body lesions in the entire cohort of firefighters, reaching the level of (2,49 ± 0,32)•10–4 injuries/(person•year) equal to 20.8 % of all occupational injuries; knee and shin injuries were assigned rank 2 (S80-S89) – (1.87 ± 0.24)•10–4 equal to 15.6 %; ankle and foot area were assigned rank 3 (S90–S99) – (1.11 ± 0.15)•10–4 equal to 9,3 %; rank 4 injuries were injuries of the thorax (S20–S29) – (0.91 ± 0.13)•10–4 equal to 7.6 %; wrist and hand injuries were assigned rank 5 (S40–S49) – (0.88 ± 0.07)•10–4 equal to 7.4 % respectively. Overall, these body traumas amounted to 60.7 % of all occupational injuries of external causes. In the genesis of damages of body areas of firefighters during occupational injury, the leading place is given to head injuries, which contribute to loss of balance and create conditions for falling, as a result of which other areas of the body are injured. The analysis of occupational injuries and nosologies across different workforce categories was effectively performed taking account of injury causes and types of activity.
Conclusion. The analysis of cause-and-effect relations of all injuries among heads of subdivisions, occupational safety officers, fire engineers, firefighters and doctors allows to improve prevention of occupational injuries among officers of the Federal Fire Service of EMERCOM of Russia.

1. Aleksanin S.S., Bobrinev E.V., Evdokimov V.I. [et al.]. Zabolevaemost’ s trudopoteryami u sotrudnikov Gosudarstvennoi protivopozharnoi sluzhby MChS Rossii (1996–2015 gg.) [Morbidity with job absenteeism in employees of EMERCOM of Russia (1996–2015)]. Mediko-biologicheskie i sotsial’no-psikhologicheskie problemy bezopasnosti v chrezvychaynykh situatsiyakh [Medico-Biological and Socio-Psychological Problems of Safety in Emergency Situations]. 2018; (1):5–18. DOI: 10.25016/2541-7487-2018-0-1-05-18. (In Russ.)

2. Afanas’ev V.N., Yuzbashev M.M. Analiz vremennykh ryadov i prognozirovanie [Time Series Analysis and Forecasting]. Moscow. 2015. 320 p. (In Russ.)

3. Voroshilov S.P., Voroshilov A.S. Travmatizm. Funktsiya raspredeleniya stepeni tyazhesti vreda zdorov’yu sredi rabotnikov [Traumatism. The function of health severity distribution among employees]. Bezopasnost’ i okhrana truda [Safety and Labor Protection]. 2014; (3):55–59. (In Russ.)

4. Evdokimov V.I., Aleksanin S.S., Bobrinev E.V. [et al.] Analiz pokazatelei zabolevaemosti, travmatizma, invalidnosti i smertnosti sotrudnikov Gosudarstvennoi protivopozharnoi sluzhby Rossii (1996–2015 gg.) [Analysis of morbidity, traumatism, disability and mortality rates in employees of the Russian State Fire Service (1996–2015)]. Ed. V.I. Evdokimov. St. Petersburg. 2019. 167 p. (In Russ.)

5. Evdokimov V.I., Bobrinev E.V., Kondashov A.A. [et al.]. Analiz proizvodstvennogo travmatizma i gibeli lichnogo sostava Federal’noi protivopozharnoi sluzhby MChS Rossii (2006–2020 gg.) [Analysis of occupational injury and mortality of personnel of the Federal Fire Service of the EMERCOM of Russia (2006–2020)]. Ed. V.I. Evdokimov. St. Petersburg. 2022. 138 p. (In Russ.)

6. Karnachev P.I., Vinnichenko N.A., Karnachev I.P. Statisticheskie pokazateli proizvodstvennogo travmatizma, ispol’zuemye v otechestvennoi i mezhdunarodnoi praktike otsenki urovnya bezopasnosti truda [Statistical indicators of traumatism, used in the domestic and international practice of industrial safety assessment level]. Bezopasnost’ i okhrana truda [Safety and Labor Protection]. 2015; (2):37–40. (In Russ.)

7. Kondashov A.A., Udavtsova E.Yu., Mashtakov V.A. [et al.]. Otsenka dopustimogo riska travmirovaniya lichnogo sostava Federal’noi protivopozharnoi sluzhby MChS Rossii [Assessment of the acceptable risk of injury in employees of the Federal fire service of EMERCOM of Russia]. Mediko-biologicheskie i sotsial’no-psikhologicheskie problemy bezopasnosti v chrezvychaynykh situatsiyakh [Medico-Biological and Socio-Psychological Problems of Safety in Emergency Situations]. 2021. № 1. С. 40–49. DOI: 10.25016/2541-7487-2021-0-1-40-49. (In Russ.)

8. Matyushin A.V., Poroshin A.A., Kharin V.V. [et al.]. Faktornyi podkhod k otsenke travmatizma pozharnykh [Factorial approach to assessing the injury rate of firefighters]. Aktual’nye problemy pozharnoi bezopasnosti [Actual problems of fire safety]: Scientific. Conf. Proceedings. Moscow. 2015; 3:222–227. (In Russ.)

9. Poroshin A.A., Kharin V.V., Bobrinev E.V. [et al.]. Bank statisticheskikh dannykh po zabolevaemosti, travmatizmu, invalidnosti i gibeli lichnogo sostava podrazdelenii MChS Rossii pri vypolnenii sluzhebnykh obyazannostei : svidetel’stvo o registratsii bazy dannykh RU 2015621061, 13.07.2015 [Bank of statistical data on morbidity, injury, disability and death of personnel of the EMERCOM of Russia units in the performance of official duties: database registration certificate RU 2015621061, publ. 07/13/2015]. (In Russ.)

10. Fainburg G.Z. Sanitarno-gigienicheskoe normirovanie proizvodstvennykh faktorov kak ob”ektivnaya iskhodnaya osnova upravleniya riskami [Sanitary regulation of production factors as an objective basis of the original risk management]. Bezopasnost’ i okhrana truda [Safety and Labor Protection]. 2015; (2):17–21. (In Russ.)

11. Black J., Baldwin R. When risk-based regulation aims low: approaches and challenges. Regulation and Governance. 2012; 6(1):2–22. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2011.01124.x.

12. Gammarano R. Quick guide on sources and uses of statistics on occupational safety and health / International Labour Organization. Geneva. 2020. 39 p.

13. Kendall K. The Increasing Importance of Risk Management in an Uncertain World. The Journal for Quality and Participation. 2017; 40(1):Р. 4–8.

14. Paul R., Huber M. Risk-based Regulation in Continental Europe? Explaining the Corporatist Turn to Risk in German Work Safety Policies. European Policy Analysis. 2015; 1(2):5–33. DOI: 10.18278/epa.1.2.2.

15. Safety and Health at the heart of the Future of Work: Building on 100 years of experience / International Labour Organizatio. Geneva. 2019. 82 p.

16. Takala J., Hämäläinen P., Nenonen N. [et al.]. Comparative Analysis of the Burden of Injury and Illness at Work in Selected Countries and Regions. Centr. Europ. J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2017; 23(1-2):6–31.