ProfessorDrewDawsonandDrMadelineSprajcerFEBRUARY2020

FatigueGuruApplicationGuide

1|P a g e

IntroductionThisdocumentprovidesanoverviewoftheuseofthefatigueriskassessmentsmartphoneapplicationFatigueGuru.

Fatigueriskassessmentsareakeycomponentofbestpracticefatigueriskmanagementsystems.TheFatigueGuruapplicationcanbeusedtoperformtheseassessmentsquickly,simply,andinrealtime.

FatigueGuruhasthecapabilitytoincludedatatrackingcapabilities(e.g.assessmentcompletion,triagetomanger,etc.)ifthisisseenasaddingvaluefororganisationalprocessesandreportingrequirements1.

Theapplicationcanbeaccessedatwww.fatigueguru.comorviayourappstore-simplysearchforFatigueGuru.

Riskassessmentandmitigation

Fatigueriskassessmentsusetwokeyfactorstodeterminefatigue-relatedrisk:

1. Likelihoodoffatigue–Section2.12. Potentialconsequencesofafatigue-relatederror–Section2.2

Basedonthelevelofriskthatisidentified(low,moderate,high,orextreme),controlmeasurescanbedeterminedandimplemented.Seesection2.4.

2.1 Likelihood of fatigue Thefirstcomponentofafatigueriskassessmentisdeterminingthelikelihoodoffatigue.Thisisdonebasedonthreekeylevels:

Level1:Sleepopportunity

i.e.howmuchsleepisitpossiblefortheworkertohavehad?

Level2:Priorsleepwakebehaviour

i.e.howmuchsleephastheworkeractuallyhad?

1ItisimportanttonotethatwhiletheFatigueGuruapplicationcanprovidedatatrackingservices,theorganisationwouldneedtoconsultwithstakeholders,includingemployees,todeterminethelevelofcomfortwiththis.Trackingcanbeturnedofforreportedatanaggregatedlevel.

2|P a g e

Level3:Behaviouralsignsandsymptomsoffatigue

i.e.howfatiguedistheworkerfeeling?

Theselevelsalignwiththefatigue-risktrajectorymodel(seeFigure1below).Thismodeldescribesthelevelswhichmustbecontrolledtopreventfatigue-relatedincidentsfromoccurring.

Level1,2,and3assessmentscanbeusedtocalculateoveralllikelihoodscoresthatalignwiththeISO31000riskmanagementstandards.Theselikelihoodscoresarethencombinedwiththepotentialconsequencesofafatigue-relatederrortodeterminerisk.

Howeachofthesescoresarecalculatedisoutlinedinthesub-sectionsbelow.

Figure1.Fatigue-risktrajectory2

*HoursofServicerules

2.1.1 Level1:Sleepopportunity

Sleepopportunitycanbedeterminedbasedonanassessmentofrosterdimensions.RosterassessmentsareperformedtocalculateLevel1scores,whichareused(inconjunctionwithLevel2andLevel3scores)todetermineISO31000fatiguelikelihoodscores.

2Dawson,D.,&McCulloch,K.(2005).Managingfatigue:It'saboutsleep.SleepMedicineReviews,9(5),365-380.

3|P a g e

Theseassessmentsaredonebyassigningscoresbasedoncertainrosterdimensions.Thesedimensionsinclude:

• Maximumworkhoursintheprevious7days• Typicalshiftduration• Shortbreakduration• Maximumnighthoursovertheprevious7days• Daysbetweenresetbreaks3(i.e.howmanydaysareworkedconsecutively)

Basedonthehoursworked(ortobeworked),scoresareassignedtoeachofthesedimensions.ThesescoresaresummedtoproduceanoverallLevel1score.SeeTable1forrosterdimensionscores.

Table1:Rosterdimensions

RosterdimensionScore

0 1 2 4 8

Maximumworkhoursper7days ≤36h 36-43h 44-47h 48-54h 55h+

Shiftduration ≤8h 8-10h 10-12h 12-14h ≥14hShortbreakduration ≥16h 16-13h 12-10h 10-8h ≤8hMaximumhoursofnightworkper7days 0h 1-8h 8-16h 16-24h ≥24h

Daysbetweenresets <6 6 7-10 11-12 12+

InTable1,theindividualcompletingtheriskassessmentwouldselectthecolumnthatreflectstheircurrentworkhoursforeachworkingtimearrangementdimension.ThescoresassociatedwitheachdimensionarethenaddedtoproduceanoverallLevel1score.

IntheFatigueGuruapplication,yousimplystartbyselectingLevel1:Roster.

NOTE:Ifyouareusingtheapplicationtoperformafatigueriskassessmentofaroster(notforaparticularindividual)youonlyneedtouseLevel1.

3Aresetbreaktypicallyconsistsofaminimumoftwonightsofsleepwithonedayoffinbetween.Thetechnicaldefinitionreferstoabreakcommencingnolaterthanmidnight,beforerecommencingworknoearlierthan0600honthefollowingday(i.e.a32-hbreak).

4|P a g e

Youthenselecttheappropriateanswerforeachofthefiverosterdimensions.

TheapplicationwillcalculateyourLevel1scoreautomatically.

2.1.2 Level2:Priorsleepwakebehaviour

Oneofthebestmethodsforidentifyingpotentialfatigueisassessingtheamountofsleepanindividualhashadintheprevious24and48hours.Level2assessment,aswithLevel1,producesascorethatcanbeusedwithintheISO31000riskassessmentframework.

Level2scoresarealsoreferredtoaspersonalFatigueLikelihoodScores(pFLS).

Thescoreiscalculatedaccordingtothefollowingrule:

Xscore:Foreveryhourofsleeplessthan5hintheprevious24hadd4points

Yscore:Foreveryhourofsleeplessthan12hintheprevious48hadd2points

Zscore:Foreveryhourofwakegreaterthanthehoursofsleepinthelast48hadd1point

TheFatigueGuruappwillperformthiscalculationforyoubasedonhowyouanswersomequestionsaboutyoursleepandworktimes.

pFLSscoretypicallyrangesbetween0(low)-15(extreme).

Thenyouwillbeshownanestimatedscore.Thisestimatedscoregivesyouanindicationofhowlikelyitisthatyouarefatiguednow,atbytheendofyourshift.

5|P a g e

Thiscanbeusedasanindicativetool(i.e.ifitisnotlikelythatyouarefatiguednow,buttheappsuggestsyouarelikelytobefatiguedattheendofyourshift,youmayneedtocompleteasecondfatigueriskassessmentpriortodrivinghome).

6|P a g e

2.1.3 Level3:Self-reportedbehaviouralsignsandsymptomsoffatigue

Behaviouralsymptomsandmonitoringarelevel3controls(i.e.howistheindividualfeelingatthattime).Thisisascorefrom1-9thatcanbeusedtoidentifyanindividual’scurrentlevelofalertness.ThescaleusedistheKarolinskaSleepinessScale(KSS).Thisscaleisusedwidelywithinbestpracticefatigueriskmanagementsystemsandisknowntobehighlycorrelatedwithfatiguewhenansweredhonestly.

ThisisthethirdlevelthatisinvolvedincalculatinganISO31000-compliantfatiguelikelihoodscore.Individualssimplyneedtoselectthescorethatmostreflectshowtheyarefeeling.

2.1.4 DeterminingISO31000compliantfatiguelikelihoodscores

ISO31000fatiguelikelihoodscoresaredeterminedbasedonthehighestscoreineitherLevel1,2or3.FromtheretheISO31000fatiguelikelihoodscoreiseasilycalculated.Thelikelihoodscorerangesfrom1–5.SeeTable2.

Table2:MappingfatiguelikelihoodscoreontoISO31000

Likelihood(ISO31000)

Level1(Rosterassessment)

Level2(pFLS) Level3(KSS)

1 0-5 0 1-2

2 6-11 1-4 3-4

3 12-20 4-8 5-6

4 21-25 9-12 7-8

5 25+ 12+ 9

ThethreecolumnslabelledRosterScore,CalculatorScore,andKSSScorereflectLevel1,2,and3scores.

7|P a g e

TodeterminetheISO31000likelihoodscore,youmustconsidertheRosterscore,Calculatorscore,andKSSscore.Inmanyorganisations,primacywillbegiventoLevel3(KSS)scores,thoughdeterminationmaydifferbetweenorganisations.

Undermostcircumstances,itismostappropriatetoselectthescorethatcorrespondstothehighestscoringrow(i.e.theLevelwiththehighestscoreisusedtodetermineISO31000scores,andassociatedcontrolmeasures).

Inthisscreenshot,youcanseethatanISO31000likelihoodscoreof3hasbeenselected,becausethehighestoftheRosterscore,Calculatorscore,andKSSscoreisinthethirdrow.

8|P a g e

2.2 Consequences of a fatigue-related error Inordertoassessrisk,theorganisationmustalsodevelopanunderstandingofthepotentialconsequencesofafatigue-relatederror.

Typically,thiswillreflecttheoutcomesofanindividualexperiencingamicrosleepwhileperformingatask(e.g.fallingasleepwhiledrivingavehicle).Consequencesmayalsobeassociatedwithpoordecisionmakingorworkperformance.

Consequenceratingstypicallyrangefrom1(insignificant)to5(catastrophic).

Theseratingsaredevelopedinconsultationwithindividualswithinworkgroups,healthandsafetyrepresentatives,andtypically,externalsubjectmatterexperts.

Inthefar-rightcolumn(inthescreenshotabove),youwillalsobeabletoselecttheappropriateconsequencescore.

9|P a g e

2.3 Determining risk RiskisdeterminedbasedonacombinationofISO31000-compliantfatiguelikelihoodscores,andconsequenceratings.

Thefollowingmatrixistypicallyusedtodeterminerisk(Table3).

Table3:Riskmatrix

Likelihoodoffatigue(ISO31000)

Severityofconsequence

1 2 3 4 5

1 Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate

2 Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High

3 Moderate Moderate Moderate High High

4 Moderate Moderate High High Extreme

5 Moderate High High Extreme Extreme

Basedonthelikelihoodandconsequencescoresyouhaveselected,ariskoutcome(andcontrolmeasures)willbepresentedtoyou.

10|P a g e

2.4 Control measures Basedonthefatigueriskassessmentdescribedinsections2.1–2.3,appropriatecontrolmeasurescanbedetermined.WhenafatigueriskassessmentisperformedviatheFatigueGurusmartphoneapplication,thelevelofriskwillthenbeshowntotheindividual,alongwithsomeexamplecontrolmeasures(seeabovescreenshots).

Mostorganisationsdevelopstandardcontrolmeasuresthatareappropriateforlow,moderate,high,andextremelevelsofrisk.Thesemeasurescanalsobedeterminebasedonwhatisappropriateforanindividual,workgroup,ortask.

Table4.Examplecontrolmeasures

Risk Level1 Level2and3Low • Workcantypicallybe

continuedwithnoadditionalcontrols,unlessahigherlevelofriskisindicated.

• Workcantypicallybecontinuedwithnoadditionalcontrols,unlessahigherlevelofriskisindicated.

Moderate • 1-upapprovalofroster(i.e.theindividual’sdirectmanagerisabletosignoffonworkbeingundertakenatthislevelofrisk)

• Additionalsleepopportunitiesprovided(e.g.nappingfacilities)

• Self-managementstrategies(e.g.strategicuseofcaffeine,taskrotation)

11|P a g e

High • 2-upapprovalofroster(i.e.theindividual’sdirectmanagerisabletosignoffonworkbeingundertakenatthislevelofrisk)

• Additionalsleepopportunitiesprovided(e.g.nappingfacilities)

• Interrogationofnecessityofscheduling(i.e.couldalternativerosteringarrangementsbemade)

• Self-managementstrategies(e.g.strategicuseofcaffeine,taskrotation)

• Managerialmanagementstrategiestypicallyindicated(e.g.increasedsupervision)

Extreme • Interrogationofnecessityofscheduling(i.e.couldalternativerosteringarrangementsbemade)

• Workwouldgenerallynotbecompletedatanextremelevelofriskwithoutexecutiveapproval

• Workwouldgenerallynotbecompletedatanextremelevelofriskwithoutexecutiveapproval