A Comparative Risk Assessment of Human Error in emergency situations using Fuzzy HEART and Fuzzy SLIM Methods

Abstract

Introduction: Incidents caused by human error often lead to serious accidents. In the studies on the causes of accidents in the workplace, human error has the largest share. Firefighting is one of the occupations in which the probability of human error and the level of risk from the beginning of the operation to the end of the operation )Extinguish the fire) could be considerable. For this purpose, this Comparative study was conducted to evaluate the risk of human error in emergency situationsusing Fuzzy HEART and Fuzzy SLIM.

Methods and materials: in this cross-sectional and descriptive-analytical study the fuzzy logic techniques of HEART and SLIM methods were comperly used to evaluate the human error risk in fierfithers. The Fuzzy HEART method was based on the tables determining Generic Task and Error Producing Conditions) EPCs) and the Fuzzy SLIM method was done based on the judgment of firefighters. 39 sub-tasks were studied in 4 phases )Awareness, Evaluation, Egress and Recovery). The Excel software was used to calculate the risk scores and the correlation and kappa statistical tests were also used for data analysis via SPSS. Results: According to the obtained results, the mean and standard deviation of human error probability number in different sub-tasks of firefighting in Fuzzy HEART method is 0.148034 ± 0.237678 and in Fuzzy SLIM method is 0.06490 ± 0.051748. In 35.9 percent of the sub-tasks, the probability category of human error and the assessed risk are the same, however, in 82.05 percent of the sub-tasks, the estimated level of risk is the same in both methods. In Fuzzy HEART method, about 15.5 percent is high risk level, 23 percent is medium risk level and 61.5 percent is related to low risk level. In Fuzzy SLIM method, high risk level is about 2.5 percent medium risk level is 36 percent and 61.5 percent also has a low level of risk. Correlation test showed that the correlation coefficient of error probability values between two methods is 0.091, which indicates a weak correlation in this regard. And also the results of kappa statistical test between the estimated level of risk in two methods showed that there is a high agreement between Fuzzy SLIM and Fuzzy HEART )P value <0.05). Conclusions: The results of this study showed that although the Fuzzy HEART method provides a different assessment of human error probability compared with the Fuzzy SLIM method, However assessment of risk level significantly is the same in both methods. Therefore, due to time-consuming the Fuzzy SLIM method, the Fuzzy HEART method can be used. Risk Assessment of Human Error among firefighters ledto identification of the type and quantitative amount of human errors as well as the level of risk obtained from these errors that can be classified Tasks and sub-tasks in terms of the level of risk of errors and the development of strategies and preventive measures to reduce the risk of these errors and be used. Keywords: Human Error, Risk Assessment, Emergency Conditions, Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy SLIM, Fuzzy HEART, Fire Station Organization