Search

The article comments on the paper "First aid training and accidents," by Gary Miller and Neil Agnew in this issue. Miller and Agnew tested the hypothesis that the probability that people trained in first aid will be involved in accidents is less than those who have not been trained. However, the data used were all obtained from the company for which the victim worked. This is erroneous because the number of accidents is not the same as the number of recorded accidents, particularly in British firms. Moreover, the authors failed to consider the fact that first-aiders are not exposed to the same risks for the same time as the other workers.

First aid training as provided by the St John Ambulance Brigade appeared to be related to reduced incidence of accidents at work. It was also related to heightened safety awareness in a community which was not, however, accompanied by changes in relevant behaviour. A model of factors affecting safety is discussed. In the comment following, Philip Powell draws attention to some risks of defective data and the faulty conclusions that inadequate information may lead to. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]