hse research report 509

EXTERNAL PUBLICATIONS

  • FABIG - 
  • Home - 
  • External Publications - 

Plant ageing: Management of equipment containing hazardous fluids or pressure

Fabig members: log-in to access all fabig resources log in.

The purpose of this report is to increase awareness of the factors to consider when managing equipment containing hazardous fluids or pressure, and to help those responsible for equipment to understand and assess the risks of accumulated damage and deterioration. The information is at a general rather than an equipment-specific level, and can be applied to a wide range of static equipment and associated machinery.

The management of equipment begins with an awareness that ageing is not about how old the equipment is, but is about what is known about its condition, and the factors that influence the onset, evolution and mitigation of its degradation. Once the symptoms of ageing are understood, and detected from inspection, a decision can be made how to proceed. The options can include putting together a case to justify continued service, re-rating, repair, or scrapping the equipment.

In addition to the engineering aspects, there are important managerial issues that should also be considered. The company culture and defined roles and responsibilities are discussed in relation to managing equipment. These are affected by staff demographics, along with skills, training and competencies. The importance of maintaining documentary information and records throughout equipment life is also highlighted.

This report and the work it describes were funded by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Its contents, including any opinions and/or conclusions expressed, are those of the author(s) alone and do not necessarily reflect HSE policy

hse research report 509

Corporate Membership

Do you have a question to get in touch please, keep up-to-date with the latest fabig news and events.

This resource is only available to FABIG members. Become a member!

Session expired

Your session has expired. Please log in again. LOGIN

Cookies on HSE Solutions

We use some essential cookies to make this service work.

We'd like to set additional cookies so we can remember your settings, understand how people use the service and make improvements.

View our  cookie policy.

Solutions from HSE

Products and services to help you solve your health and safety challenges

Solutions from HSE

Enabling a better Working World

HSL Logo

HSE SCIENCE AND RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS

Hse science and research publications:.

HSE Science and Research is published in reports, scientific journals and conference proceedings, and trade and professional magazines etc. This science and research is primarily carried out by our specialists at our Buxton laboratory, Bootle headquarters, and our Chemicals Regulations Division, (CRD) in York. Additionally we publish reports on science and research that we have commissioned from other organisations.

HSE Bootle Head Office .

A four story circular building

HSE Buxton Laboratory.

A tall glass fronted building with an open courtyard and a car park in front

HSE York CRD.

A four storey red brick building on the bank of a canal.

Open Access to HSE Science and Research

All HSE Research Reports are open access.

From 1st January 2014,  open access applies to the vast majority of peer-reviewed journal papers describing HSE-led and funded research. Copies of published papers and articles that are not open access can be obtained through your public, academic or company library service. If you do not have access to such services please contact the British Library Document Supply Centre, use British Library online . To access reports that are not listed on the website, please send in a request  - see  Contact Us . Please start the enquiry with "Request for Research Report Not Listed on HSE Website".

Bibliography of Science and Research Publications

A bibliography of all science and research publications, including those written by HSE's former agency, the Health and Safety Laboratory (HSL), are given at the links opposite. Please note that any HSL reports published in the HSE Research Reports series from 2002 onwards are available as free downloads .

Back to the top

Croner-i

Site search

The maintenance of ageing plant and equipment, you are viewing free content from a subscription product.

Croner-i is a comprehensive knowledge and resource platform that enables professionals to stay ahead of change in their industry, with legislation, trends and best practice. Call 0800 231 5199 to learn more.

  • Printable version

Last reviewed 19 February 2014

A building’s plant and equipment are physical assets that need to be properly maintained to ensure they are fit for purpose, and continue to function as efficiently and effectively as possible. Mike Sopp reports.

All plant and equipment will be subject to ageing which, if not managed appropriately, can lead to equipment/plant failure which, in turn, can lead to future financial burdens and pose health and safety, legal and business continuity issues.

As part of their overall maintenance strategy, organisations should identify plant and equipment that represents a high risk in terms of loss and which can be subject to ageing. They should put in place, as part of their maintenance strategy, a regime to maintain such items in a state of good repair and efficient working order.

Asset maintenance

A business will have many types of assets, including financial, human, information and physical, the latter of which includes items of plant and equipment. According to PAS 55 Asset Management , the management of physical assets is “complex and involves careful consideration of the trade-offs between performance, cost and risk over all stages of the asset’s life cycle”.

An overall asset management plan will include determining the most appropriate and cost-effective maintenance of the physical assets through the development of a maintenance regime. BS 8210 Guide to Facilities Maintenance , states that “a facility and the individual assets that it comprises, should be maintained to deliver the most effective outcomes in terms of minimal cost and risk”.

Maintenance can be defined as “the combination of all technical and administrative actions, including supervision, intended to retain an item or restore it, to a state in which it can perform a required function”.

To achieve this objective, BS 8210 recommends that organisations develop a policy and accompanying strategy for the management of maintenance so as to provide a consistent approach to the planning, management and reporting of asset maintenance. This maintenance policy should clearly specify the guiding principles and objectives for the management and delivery of building maintenance, with subsequent plans being devised “to ensure that the service life of facility assets matches or, where desirable, exceeds their design life”.

However, during its lifecycle, all plant and equipment can degrade due to age-related mechanisms, such as corrosion, erosion and fatigue. It is therefore essential that, as part of the overall maintenance regime, such ageing is identified and appropriate measures taken to manage the risks.

Defining ageing assets

When referring to ageing plant and equipment, it is important to note that this does not necessarily relate to the chronological ageing process, rather ageing “is the effect whereby a component suffers some form of material deterioration and damage, with an increasing likelihood of failure over the lifetime of the asset”.

Ageing plant and equipment are assets for which there is evidence or likelihood of significant deterioration and damage taking place since new, or where there is insufficient data to know the extent to which this is possible. Significance in this aspect relates to the potential effects on functionality, availability, reliability and safety.

The characteristics of an “ageing asset” are defined in the Health and Safety Executive’s (HSE) Research Report (RR) 509 Plant Ageing as when:

damage due to degradation has accumulated and may have become widespread and be accelerating

design or performance margins may have eroded to a point where future acceptable performance cannot be assumed

a different, more quantitative, approach to inspection and non-destructive testing may be necessary for determining the extent and rate of damage to demonstrate fitness for service

proactive ageing management and asset care is required through revalidation, major repairs, refurbishment and replacement of key items at various times.

The same report concludes that managing ageing plant and equipment effectively requires a paradigm shift in the way that asset condition is regarded, assessed and maintained. It suggests that this requires “a proactive approach with a thorough understanding of asset-ageing mechanisms and condition, and the ways in which assets interact”.

The management of ageing plant and equipment therefore begins with an awareness that ageing is not about how old the equipment is, but what is known about its condition, and the factors that influence the onset, evolution and mitigation of its degradation. This suggests that, for those with responsibility for maintaining ageing assets, there is a need to:

organise for ageing management in terms of identifying the assets, what they do and their criticality to the business

make an assessment of current conditions through appropriate condition surveys, inspections and associated risk assessments, including how conditions may change over the asset lifecycle

implement an ageing management programme, including the use of preventative or condition-based maintenance regimes

ensure there is feedback and analysis of the process to ensure it remains fit for purpose, including the use of performance indicators.

As well as the physical ageing process, other factors will need to be given consideration. This can include obsolescence and a lack of spare parts, or the disappearance of the original equipment manufacturer, or non-conformance with current safety requirements, codes, standards and procedures. Competency, availability and organisation of the employees responsible for asset management and knowledge management are also essential to ensuring that this understanding of current and predicted asset condition is used when making asset management decisions.

Ageing management programme

Although aimed at the nuclear industry, HSE Research Report RR912 Management of Ageing contains a number of principles that can be adopted in other industries when managing ageing plant and equipment. This is known as an ageing management programme (AMP).

The AMP should form part of the organisation’s overall asset management plan. It should detail the actions necessary to ensure ageing plant and equipment is maintained in an efficient and cost-effective way. The main elements of such a plan include:

scope of the AMP (selection of systems, structures, components and understanding of ageing)

preventative actions (operating procedures/controls to minimise ageing)

detection of ageing (inspection, testing, plant monitoring)

monitoring of trends (data analysis, predictive analysis, etc)

acceptance criteria (performance standards, probability of failure)

mitigation actions (maintenance, repairs, replacement, etc)

corrective actions (revised operating procedures, de-rating, refurbishment)

feedback of operating experience (failure database)

quality management (record-keeping).

It should be noted that, within an AMP, there might be differing schedules to those in relation to statutory compliance requirements. Where this is the case, the AMP needs to interface with such compliance requirements.

The AMP will only be effective if supported by a robust management system. RR823 Managing Ageing Plant. A Summary Guide provides useful information on the key aspects of such a system. In particular, it emphasises the need for a clear, organisational structure and communication routes, and “job continuity plans to retain job knowledge and operational skills”.

In addition, training and competency of employees involved in managing ageing assets is addressed with the recommendation that a competency development programme be developed, and structured training put in place. RR823 also makes suggestions for procedural processes, including the development of a defect reporting system and “technical safety reviews” for critical assets.

It should be noted that management of ageing plant and equipment will require regular monitoring, review and revalidation following any unwanted incidents, major repairs, refurbishment or replacement of key items.

Further information

PAS 55–1: 2008 Asset Management. Specification for the Optimized Management of Physical Assets (British Standards Institution)

BS 8210: 2012 Guide to Facilities Maintenance Management (British Standards Institution)

RR509 Plant Ageing. Management of Equipment Containing Hazardous Fluids or Pressure (Health and Safety Executive)

RR823 Managing Ageing Plant. A Summary Guide (Health and Safety Executive)

RR912 Management of Ageing. A Framework for Nuclear Chemical Facilities (Health and Safety Executive)

  • Maintenance of portable electrical equipment
  • Accident report: exploding pressure vessel
  • Better maintenance, better safety… a 2016 resolution
  • Pillars of preventative maintenance
  • Risk assessment, asbestos and maintenance workers

Questions and Answers

  • Passenger lift maintenance best practice
  • Maintenance regime for equipment
  • Certification for fixed electrical installation
  • Work equipment inspections
  • Ladder inspection and maintenance

Cookies on HSE Solutions

We use some essential cookies to make this service work.

We'd like to set additional cookies so we can remember your settings, understand how people use the service and make improvements.

View our  cookie policy.

Solutions from HSE

Products and services to help you solve your health and safety challenges

Solutions from HSE

Enabling a better Working World

HSL Logo

HSE Science and Research Publications 2022

Journal papers, conference publications, trade and professional magazine articles.

  • Book Chapters

Reports by HSE Scientists and Expert Committees

  • National and Official Statistics Publications

Abbott K, Buston J, Gill J, Goddard S, Howard D, Howard G, Read E and Williams R (2022)  Comprehensive gas analysis of a 21700 Li(Ni0.8Co0.1Mn0.1O2) cell using mass spectrometry .  Journal of Power Sources , 539 231585

Bacon J, Butler O, Cairns W, Cavoura O, Cook J, Davidson C and Mertz-Kraus R. (2022) Atomic Spectrometry Update - a review of advances in environmental analysis . JAAS Journal, 37, 9-49.

Bailey C, Johnson P, Moran J, Rosa I, Brookes J, Hall S and Crook B (2022) Simulating the environmental spread of SARS CoV-2 via cough and the effect of personal mitigations. Microorganisms , 10 (11), 2241

Beards P (2022) A new human factors incident taxonomy for members of the public (HFIT-MP): an investigation of escalator incidents . Safety Science , 147 105597

Beswick A, Fry C, Bradley CS, Pottage T, Sharpe S, Haill C, Mugglestone M, Bak A, Marsden G, Bennett A, Garvey M and Wilson A (2022) Automated room decontamination: report of a Healthcare Infection Society Working Party . Journal of Hospital Infection , 124, 97-120

Brainard J,  Hall S, van Der Es M, Sekoni A, Price A, Padoveze M, Ogunsola F, Nichiata L, Hornsey E,  Crook B, Cirino F, Chu L and  Hunter P . (2022) A mixed methods study on effectiveness and appropriateness of face shield use as COVID-19 PPE in middle income countries . American Journal of Infection Control , 50, 878-884.

Bramwell L, Morton J, Harding A-H, Lin N and Entwistle J (2022) Determinants of blood and saliva lead concentrations in adult gardeners on urban agricultural sites . Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 44 (10), 3493-3513

Chen Y, Aldridge T, Ferraro C and Khaw, F-M . (2022) COVID-19 outbreak rates and infection attack rates associated with the workplace: a descriptive epidemiological study . BMJ Open, 12 , e055643

Coldrick S, Kelsey A, Ivings M, Foat T, Parker S, Noakes C, Bennett A, Rickard H and Moore G (2022) Modeling and experimental study of dispersion and deposition of respiratory emissions with implications for disease transmission . Indoor Air , 32 (2), e13000

De Matteis S, Jarvis D, Darnton L, Consonni D, Kromhout H, Hutchings S, Sadhra S, Fishwick D, Vermeulen R, Rushton L and Cullinan P (2022) Lifetime occupational exposures and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease risk in the UK Biobank Cohort .  Thorax, 77 (10), 997-1005

Drahota A, Felix L, Raftery J, Keenan B, Lachance C, Mackey D, Markham C, Laing A, Farrell-Savage K and Okunribido O (2022)  Shock-absorbing flooring for fall-related injury prevention in older adults and staff in hosptials and care homes: the SAFEST systematic review. Health Technology Assessmen t, 26 (5), 1-196

Edwards J and Buckley P (2022) Risk of work-related violence in England and Wales . Occupational Medicine , 72 (1), 25-27

Fishwick D, Carder M, Iskandar I, Fishwick B and Van Tongeren M (2022) Occupational inhalational accidents; analysis of cases from the UK SWORD reporting scheme from 1999 to 2018 . Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 79 (9), 628-630

Fishwick D, Harding A-H, Chen Y, Pearce N and Frost G (2022)  Asthma in pesticide users. An update from the Great Britain Prospective Investigation of Pesticide Applicators' Health (PIPAH) cohort study .  Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 79(6), 380-387

Fishwick D and Kiely D (2022)  Vascular compression and pulmonary hypertension: the occupational context. Occupational & Environmental Medicine , 79 (11), 721-722

Foat T, Higgins B, Abbs S, Maishman T, Coldrick S, Kelsey A, Ivings M, Parker S and Noakes C (2022)  Modeling the effect of temperature and relative humidity on exposure to SARS-CoV-2 in a mechanically ventilated room .  Indoor Air , 32 (11), e13146

Fox S, Hanna S, Mazzola T, Spicer T, Chang J and Gant S (2022) Overview of Jack Rabbit II (JR II) field experiment and summary of the methods used in the dispersion model comparisons. Atmospheric Environment , 269 118783

Fransman W, Arnone M, Borghi F, Cattaneo A, Cavallo D, Cherrie J, Franken R, Galea K, Van Der Haar R, Heussen G, Jensen K, Koponen M, Koppisch D, Kromhout H, Luo Y-S, McNally K, Saamanen A, Spinazze A, Van Tongeren M, Vanoirbeek J, Verpaele S, Vetter D, Viegas S and Warren N. (2022)  Response letter to Koivisto et al. 'Evaluating the theoretical background of STOFFENMANAGER® and the advanced REACH tool '.  Annals of Work Exposures and Health , 66(4), 543-549

Frost G, Liddle M, Fairhurst C, Cockayne S, Cunningham-Burley R, Torgerson D and On Behalf of the SSHeW Study (2022) R elationship between age, workplace slips and the effectiveness of slip-resistant footwear among healthcare workers . Injury Prevention , 28(3), 256-258

Gartland N, Fishwick D, Coleman A, Davies K, Hartwig A, Johnson S and Van Tongeren M (2022) Transmission and control of SARS-CoV-2 on ground public transport: a rapid review of the literature up to May 2021 . Journal of Transport and Health , 26 101356

Hall S, Stacey P, Pengelly I, Stagg S, Saunders J and Hambling S. (2022) Characterising and comparing emissions of dust, respirable crystalline silica and volatile organic compounds from natural and artificial stones . Annals of Work Exposures and Health , 66 (2), 139-149

Hanna S, Mazzola T, Chang J, Spicer T, Gant S and Batt R. (2022) Gaps in Toxic Industrial Chemical (TIC) Model Systems: Improvements and Changes over Past Ten Year. Process Safety Progress , 41(1) 151-166

Jones K, Galea K, Scholten B, Loikala M, Porras S, Bousoumah R, Ndaw S, Leese E, Louro H, Silva M, Viegas S, Godderis L, Verdonck J, Poels K, Goen T, Duca R, Santonen T and HBM4EU Diisocyanates Study Team (2022) HBM4EU diisocyanates study - research protocol for a collaborative European human biological monitoring study on occupational exposur e. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 19 (14), 8811

Loizou G, McNally K, Paini A and Hogg A (2022) Derivation of a Human In Vivo Benchmark Dose for Bisphenol A from ToxCast In Vitro Concentration Response Data Using a Computational Workflow for Probabilistic Quantitative In Vitro to In Vivo Extrapolation . Frontiers in Pharmacology , 12 754408

Louro H, et al including Jones K. (2022) The use of human biomonitoring to assess occupational exposure to PAHS in Europe: A comprehensive review . Toxics 10(8) 480

McNally K, Goede H, Schinkel J, Gorce J-P and Warren N (2022)  The Dermal Advanced REACH Tool (dART): a Bayesian model for dermal exposure assessment .  Annals of Work Exposures and Health , 66 (5), 602-617

Morton J, Sams C, Leese E, Garner F, Iqbal S and Jones K (2022)  Biological monitoring: evidence for reductions in occupational exposure and risk . Frontiers in Toxicology, 4

Mueller W, Atuhaire A, Mubeezi R, Van Den Brenk I, Kromhout H, Basinas I, Jones K, Povey A, Van Tongeren M, Harding A-H, Galea K and Fuhrimann S (2022) Evaluation of two-year recall of self-reported pesticide exposure among Ugandan smallholder farmers . International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 240 113911

Mueller W, Jones K, Mohamed H, Bennett N, Harding A-H, Frost G, Povey A, Basinas I, Kromhout H, Van Tongeren M, Fuhrimann S and Galea K (2022) Recall of exposure in UK farmers and pesticide applicators: trends with follow-up time. Annals of Work Exposures and Health, 66 (6), 754-767

Ndaw S, et al including Leese, L. (2022)  HBM4EU chromates study - Usefulness of measurement of blood chromium levels in the assessment of occupational Cr(VI) exposure .  Environmental Research , 214 (1), 113758

Nwoko K, Kenny L and Jones K (2022) Methylenediphenyl diisocyanate lysine conjugates in the urine of workers exposed to methylenediphenyl diisocyanate . Toxicology and Industrial Health, 38 (9), 636-642

Ohlander J, Fuhrimann S, Basinas I, Cherrie J, Galea K, Povey A, Van Tongeren M, Harding A-H, Jones K, Vermeulen R, Huss A and Kromhout H (2022) Impact of occupational pesticide exposure assessment method on risk estimates for prostate cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Parkinson's disease: results of three meta-analyses . Occupational and Environmental Medicine , 79 (8), 566-574

Pique S, Quesnel S, Weinberger B, Novelot Q, Houssin D, Vyazmina E, Torrado D and Saw J-L (2022) Preliminary risk assessment of hydrogen refuelling stations in a multifuel context . Chemical Engineering Transactions , 90 229-234

Raja A, Van Veldhoven K, Ewuzie A, Frost G, Sandys V, Atkinson B, Nicholls I, Graham A, Higgins A, Coldwell M, Simpson A, Cooke J, Bennett A, Barber C, Morgan D, Atchison C, Keen C, Fletcher T, Pearce N, Brickley E and Chen Y (2022) Investigation of a SARS-CoV-2 outbreak at an automotive manufacturing site in England. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (11), 6400

Rasmussen P, Levesque C, Butler O, Chenier M and Gardner D (2022) Selection of metric for indoor-outdoor source apportionment of metals in PM2.5: mg/kg versus ng/m3 . Indoor Air, 32 (1), e12924

Ruiz P, and Loizou G (2022) Editorial: application of computational tools to health and environmental sciences, Volume II. Frontiers in Pharmacology , 13, 1102431.

Santonen T et al including Jones K and Leese E. (2022) HBM4EU Chromates study - overall results and recommendations for the biomonitoring of occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium. Environmental Research , 204 (Part A), 111984

Shelke A, Buston J, Gill J, Howard D, Abbott K, Goddard S, Read E, Howard G, Abaza A, Cooper B and Wen J (2022) Characterizing and predicting 21700 NMC lithium-ion battery thermal runaway induced by nail penetration . Applied Thermal Engineering , 209, 118278

Shelke A, Buston J, Gill J, Howard D, Williams R, Read E, Abaza A, Cooper B, Richards P and Wen J (2022)  Combined numerical and experimental studies of 21700 lithium-ion battery thermal runaway induced by different thermal abuse . International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer , 194 123099

Stacey P, Clegg F, Rhyder G and Sammon C (2022) Application of a Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Principal Component Regression (PCR) chemometric method for the quantification of respirable crystalline silica (quartz), kaolinite and coal in coal dusts from Australia, UK and South Africa. Annals of Work Exposures and Health, 66 (6), 781-793

Stacey P, Clegg F, Rhyder G and Sammon C (2022) Correction to: Application of a Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) Principal Component Regression (PCR) chemometric method for the quantification of respirable crystalline silica (quartz), kaolinite and coal in coal dusts from Australia, UK and South Africa. Annals of Work Exposures and Health , 66 (6), 825-826

Stacey P, Clegg F and Sammon C (2022) Multicomponent measurement of respirable quartz, kaolinite and coal dust using Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR):  A comparison between partial least squares and principal component regression . Annals of Work Exposures and Health , 66 (5), 644-655

Stettler M, et al including Coldrick, S . (2022)  Source terms for benchmarking models of SARS-CoV-2 transmission via aerosols and droplets. Royal Society Open Science , 9 212022

Vendra C, Shelke A, Buston J, Gill J, Howard D, Read E, Abaza A, Cooper B and Wen J (2022)  Numerical and experimental characterisation of high energy density 21700 lithium-ion battery fires .  Process Safety and Environmental Protection , 160 153-165

Viegas S et al including Jones K and Leese E . (2022) HBM4EU Chromates study: determinants of exposure to hexavalent chromium in plating, welding and other occupational settings. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (6), 3683

Visser M, Gosens I, Bard D, Van Broekhuizen P, G. J, Kuempel E, Riediker M, Vogel U and Dekkers S. (2022)  Towards Health-based Nano Reference Values (HNRVs) for occupational exposure: recommendations from an expert panel. NanoImpact , 26 100396

Zare Jeddi M, et al including Jones K (2022)  Developing human biomonitoring as a 21st Century Toolbox within the European Exposure Science Strategy 2020-2030 .  Environmental International , 168, 107476

Atkinson B, Van Veldhoven K, Nicholls I, Coldwell M, Clarke A, Frost G, Atchison C, Raja A, Bennett A, Morgan D, Pearce N, Fletcher T, Brickley E and Chen Y (2022) An outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in a public-facing office in England, 2021. medRxiv

Hall S, Johnson P, Bailey C, Gould Z, White W and Crook B (2022) Evaluation of face shields, goggles and safety glasses as a virus transmission control measure to protect the wearer against cough droplets . Preprints , 2022020323

Conference Papers

Birkitt K, Hobbs J and Chapman I (2022) Failure of a 30 inch diameter oil pipeline due to atmospheric corrosion . Hazards 32 , Harrogate, UK, 18-20 Oct 2022, Paper 5

Gant S, et al including including Hetherington R, McGillivray A, Kelsey A and Tucker H (2022)  Summary of results from the Jack Rabbit III international model inter-comparison exercise on Desert Tortoise and FLADIS. HARMO21 21st International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory Purposes, Aveiro, Portugal, 27-30 Sept 2022

Hetherington R, Tickle G, Bowman V, Silk D, Gant S, Kelsey A, McGillivray A and Tucker H (2022)  Drift modelling of the Desert Tortoise and FLADIS ammonia trials for the Jack Rabbit III model inter-comparison exercise . HARMO21 21st International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory Purposes , Aveiro, Portugal, 27-30 Sept 2022

Inan E, Thompson P, Christopoulou F, Yates T and Ananiadou S . (2022)  Knowledge graph enrichment of a semantic search system for construction safety. In: Arai, K. (eds) Intelligent Systems and Applications: IntelliSys 2022. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 544, 33-52

McGillivray A, Harper M, Hart F, Puttick S, Ibrahim A, Verdier L, Gant S, Hetherington R and Tucker H (2022)  PHAST modelling of the Desert Tortoise and FLADIS ammonia trials for the Jack Rabbit III model inter-comparison exercise. HARMO21 21st International Conference on Harmonisation within Atmospheric Dispersion Modelling for Regulatory Purposes , Aveiro, Portugal, 27-30 Sept 2022, 087

Newton A (2022)  Pipeline release rate model (PiRRaM) for pressure liquefied gases .  Hazards 32 , Harrogate, UK, 18-20 Oct 2022, Paper 2

Simpson A, Saunders J and Keen C (2022) Investigation into workplace ventilation at COVID-19 outbreak sites.  Indoor Air 2022 , Kuopio, Finland, 12th-16th June 2022

Conference Abstracts

Descatha A and Jones K (2022) Special session 8 from the chemical massive disaster to the prevention . Safety and Health at Work , 13 (Supp), S22 Abstract of the 33rd International Congress on Occupational Health 2022 (IOCH 2022) 6-10 February 2022, S22

Fishwick D, Carder M, Iskandar I, Fishwick B and Van Tongeren M (2022) Occupational inhalation accidents in the UK: findings from the Surveillance of Work Related Occupational Respiratory Diseases (SWORD) scheme 1999-2018 . Safety and Health at Work , 13 (Supp Abstract of the 33rd International Congress on Occupational Health 2022 (IOCH 2022) 6-10 February 2022), S123-124

Lewis C, Johnson S, Hartwig A, Ubido J, Coleman A, Gartland N, Kamal A, Goakar A, Armitage C, Fishwick D and Van Tongeren M (2022) OP61 Areas of COVID-19 prevalence: drivers of prevalence and mitigating strategies . Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health : SSM Annual Scientific Meeting Sept 2022, A29-A30

Morton J, Sams C, Leese E, Garner F, Iqbal S and Jones K (2022) Biological monitoring: evidence for reductions in occupational exposure and risk . Safety and Health at Work , 13 (Supp Abstract of the 33rd International Congress on Occupational Health 2022 (IOCH 2022) 6-10 February 2022, S240

Sandys V, Keen C, Simpson A, Coldwell M, Atkinson B and Chen Y (2022) The implementation of environmental risk controls at worksites experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks - UK COVID-19 National Core Studies Consortium . Safety and Health at Work , 13 (Supp Abstract of the 33rd International Congress on Occupational Health 2022 (IOCH 2022) 6-10 February 2022, S173-S174

Santonen T, et al including Jones K, and Leese L.and L. (2022) Assessment of occupational exposure to hexavalent chromium - recommendations from HBM4EU chromates study. Safety and Health at Work , 13 (Supp Abstract of the 33rd International Congress on Occupational Health 2022 (IOCH 2022) 6-10 February 2022), S56-S57

Thompson C, Webb S, Leedale J, Penson P, Paini A, Ebbrell D and Madden J P17-04 An automated tool for selection of chemical analogues to facilitate development of new physiologically-based kinetic models using a read-across approach . Toxicology Letters: Abstracts of the XVIth International Congress of Toxicology (ICT 2022) - Uniting in Toxicology 18-21 Sept 2022, Maastricht, Netherlands, 1 Sept 2022, S228

Wood dust: do you have adequate controls in place to protect your staff and comply with HSE guidance? Woodworking News , 37 (4), 17

Hawker A. (2022) Lower noise, vibration and dust emissions from angle grinding - recent HSE research.  Acoustics Bulletin , 48-49

Hawker A. (2022) Lower noise, vibration and dust emissions from angle grinding.  Exposure Magazine , 14

Sandys V. (2022) Occupational hygienists play a key role in COVID-19 research .  Exposure Magazine , 1 Mar 2022, 18

Simpson A. and Lekka C. (2022) HSE research on wood dust in manufacturing . Woodworking News, April 2022, 37(4) 23

Book chapters

Ewan B, Moodie K and Hawksworth S Chapter 4 - Accident consequences. In: ed, Hydrogen Safety for Energy Applications: Engineering design, risk assessment, and codes and standards, 2022,  195-261

Fishwick D and Barber C Chapter 3: Respiratory Disorders . In: ed, In: Textbook of Occupational Medicine Practice (5th ed) 2022,  55-105

Hawksworth S, Jordan T, Jeffrey K and Melideo D Chapter 5 - Risk assessment. In: ed, Hydrogen Safety for Energy Applications: Engineering design, risk assessment, and codes and standards, 2022,  263-299

Bailey C, Brookes J and Evans G (2022) Metalworking fluid and use of compressed airguns in machining: expert workshop . (RR1171) HSE

Barrowcliffe D and Davies L (2022)  Asbestos exposures to workers in the licensed asbestos removal industry .  (RR1176) HSE

Beattie H, Hemingway M, Moore A, Pocock D and Bennett S (2022)  Freight containers: potential worker exposure to hazardous atmospheres at ports and distribution centres . (RR1178) HSE

Brueck L and Brereton P (2022) Forestry wood chippers: suitability of measurement procedures used to provide the manufacturer's and supplier's noise advice to purchasers and users . (RR1173) HSE

Chaplin Z (2022) Fireball mathematical models and experimental data: A literature review. (RR1185) HSE

Coldrick S and Webber D. (2022)  Modelling flashing liquid releases for hazardous area classification including LPG and ammonia. (RR1189) HSE.

Coldwell M, Saunders J, Bennett S and Smith P (2022) Evaluation of exposure controls used in electrolytic nickel plating. (RR1184) HSE

Coleman A, Gartland N, Fishwick D, Johnson S. and van Tongeren, M. (2022)  Perceptions of transmission and mitigation of SARS-CoV-2: public transport. Theme 3 WP1 deep dives. PROTECT COVID-19 National Core Study on Transmission and Environment (PROTECT-02)

Cruse H and Lamb A (2022) Gas dispersion model DRIFT 3.6.14:Modelling the dispersion of continuous releases of toxic pressure-liquefied gases (RR1167) HSE.

Cruse H and Coldrick S. (2022) Gas dispersion model DRIFT 3.6.14: Evaluation and assessment . (RR1165) HSE.

Gant S, Halford A, Atkinson G, Kelsey A, Torrado D, Hooker P, Lander D, Isaac T, Oxley R, Garrison A, Goff R and Spriggs C (2022) Hydrogen in the natural gas distribution network: preliminary analysis of gas release and dispersion behaviour. (RR1169) HSE,

Gant S, Tickle G, Tucker H, McKenna B, Batt R, Kelsey A, Garcia M, McGillivray A,  Stewart J, and Wardman M, (2022) Jack Rabbit II chlorine release experiements:HSE scientific contribution and main findings . HSE, (RR1174)

Giannissi S, et al. including Rattigan W, Moodie K, Pursell M. (2022) D2.3 Final report on analytical, numerical, and experimental studies on hydrogen dispersion in tunnels, including innovative prevention and mitigation strategies . HyTunnel.

Hawker A, Hewitt S and Hunwin G (2022) Hand-arm vibration and noise emissions of battery-powered tools compared with equivalent traditionally-powered tools. (RR1182) HSE

Hawker A and Patel J (2022) Chainsaws noise information from suppliers: usefulness for tool selection and risk assessment to protect workers. (RR1183) HSE

Health and Safety Executive (2022)  Annual Science Review 2022 , HSE

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Re-use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic: Evidence summary to August 2020 . (ER004) HSE.

HSE Workplace Health Expert Committee (WHEC) (2022) Work-related suicide.>(WHEC-18) HSE.

Jagger S, Willoughby D and Gill J (2022) Preliminary Fire Testing of Composite Pipe Repairs . (RR1181) HSE

Jones A and Stewart M (2022) Secondary Guarding on Mobile Elevated Work Platforms (MEWPs): Appraisal of the level of protection offered. (RR1180) HSE

McGillivray A and Cruse H (2022) Gas dispersion model DRIFT 3.6.14: Modelling the dispersion of flashing instantaneous releases of toxic substances . (RR1166) HSE.

Markert F, et al. including Bergin S and Pursell M. (2022) D3.3 Final report on analytical, numerical, and experimental studies on fires, including innovative prevention and mitigation strategies .HyTunnel

OECD (2022) Occupational Biomonitoring Guidance Document, OECD Series on Testing and Assessment,No. 370 , Environment, Health and Safety, Environment Directorate, OECD

Rattigan W, et al.including Moodie K. (2022) 4.3 Final report on analytical, numerical, and experimental studies on explosions, including innovative prevention and mitigation strategies.HyTunnel

Saw J-L et al including Rattigan W, Moodie K, Bergin S, Wilday J and Pursell M . (2022) D6.9 Recommendations for inherently safer use of hydrogen vehicles in underground traffic systems .HyTunnel

Smith E (2022)  Mechanical assessment of tower crane slewing brakes . (RR1172) HSE

National and official statistics publications

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Management information: Coronavirus (COVID-19) disease reports made by employers to HSE and local authorities since 10 Apr 2020 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Soft fruit crops in the UK, 2020 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Orchards in the United Kingdom, 2020 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Potato stores in the United Kingdom 2020 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Fatal injuries arising from accidents at work in Great Britain: Summary for April to December 2021.

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Exposure to lead in Great Britain 2020 to 2021 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Fatal injuries in the workplace in Great Britain 2021 to 2022 (year end March): Annual release . Available at:

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Mesothelioma and asbestosis mortality in Great Britain: 1968 to 2020.

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Fatal injuries arising from accidents at work in Great Britain: Summary for April to June 2022 .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Health and safety statistics: 2021 to 2022 annual release .

Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Outdoor vegetable crops in the United Kingdom 2021 .

Back to the top

Asset Management

From operational risk assessments to investment strategies, Tutis Energy can advise on all aspects of asset management.

How we help

Asset health review.

An asset health review consists of a full assessment of process plant equipment, systems, procedures and competencies to provide a complete view of the plants current asset integrity.

Operational Risk Assessment (ORA)

The ORA study for major installations is an overview process in which the condition, history and mode of operation of equipment with known asset health issues is assessed together with practices and procedures of the organisation responsible for equipment management.

Ageing Assets Review

A review of ageing assets consists of a full assessment of operating and maintenance practices and procedures, in order to determine gaps when compared to the HSE Research Report 509 (RR509) “Plant Ageing, Management of Equipment containing Hazardous fluids or Pressure”.

Reliability Studies

Conducting reliability studies of fixed and rotating equipment to develop risk based inspection and maintenance strategies, that are based on the knowledge of the risk of failure of critical equipment items. These strategies are developed utilising proven techniques such as Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA).

Investment Strategies

Development of investment programmes based on asset health condition and operational risks being actively managed.

LPG Storage Safety Compliance

Navigating the complexities of fuel storage safety can be daunting. At Tutis Energy, we are committed to making this process simpler and safer for you. Learn how we ensure your safety and compliance with LPG storage .

Find out more

Let's work together

Our team are ready to hear from you

Challenges for Health and Safety in Higher Education and Research Organisations

  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

1.1 Introduction

1.2 survey results comparison, 1.3 closing remarks, chapter 1: introduction to challenges for health and safety in research.

  • Published: 19 Nov 2020
  • Special Collection: 2020 ebook collection , ECCC Environmental eBooks 1968-2022
  • Open the Chapter PDF for in another window
  • Get permissions
  • Cite Icon Cite

O. Kuzmina and S. Hoyle, in Challenges for Health and Safety in Higher Education and Research Organisations, ed. O. Kuzmina and S. Hoyle, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2020, pp. 1-18.

Download citation file:

  • Ris (Zotero)
  • Reference Manager

Results from the University and Research Institutions survey are presented in this chapter revealing what are the most common challenges faced by health and safety professionals, managers and researchers in these organisations. Barriers discovered are collated in five categories: physical, economical, organisational, behavioural and industry specific. Where appropriate this chapter directs the reader to a relevant chapter for further in-depth analysis. The appendix at the end of the chapter is a collection of feedback from survey responders on how workplace health and safety, in their view, could be improved.

This is the first time I have been involved with writing and helping to produce a book. All was going well; chapter drafts were being sent to us by the various authors and we enjoyed reading about experiences and the challenges faced in our sector (we hope you do too!). Our day-to-day work was busy and my team were focused on providing great advice and support to our academic colleagues. We were preparing for various challenges and reviewing how we could improve and provide staff and students with skills to apply principles of risk assessment to their work. Then on 18th March our university was effectively closed, and all work was stopped due to COVID19.

The effect of this was acute – labs having to be safely shut down in a very short period of time, and stressful for all involved due to the logistics of being able to achieve this while also thinking about the potential impact on work, life, family and our future.

It is June 5th and in the UK the lockdown is being eased. Olga and I must admit that for the last few months this chapter has been left to gather dust while we worked remotely to support our Departments in their decision making, and provided advice on assessments for work on COVID19 related projects. For the last two weeks I have returned to our campuses in London to help with planning for the gradual reintroduction of staff and students into our buildings and for work to start again in this ‘new normal’.

Many of the chapters in this book have been written and completed before the COVID19 crisis, however I think the experiences are still relevant to practitioners in our sector and beyond, even with the introduction of social distancing and other COVID19 controls. The COVID19 work requirements will require us as a profession to adapt and be even more innovative in our approaches. We don't believe that higher education, and in fact most workplaces, will be able to return to pre COVID19 working for a while yet. Looking through the chapter titles our authors have provided, you can see that the challenges to operating successfully with social distancing and other strategies to reduce infection will require significant thought and planning. Therefore, we think we can confidently say that a revised edition of this book will contain reflections by our returning authors (and new ones) on how they and their workplaces adapted to COVID19 and how it influenced their approaches.

Crucially I would say that in my experience so far during this crisis, the work done by technical staff, admin support and estates to get buildings and procedures ready for a phased return of researchers has been magnificent. Academic leadership from our Departments and Faculty has been excellent, and we have all pulled together to provide support to each other and direction through these difficult times. We are on the cusp of having the first few researchers return to work on the 8th June, with more returning over the coming weeks. Currently the plan for our Departments is to achieve up to 25% occupancy of research buildings using cohort models or similar that allow lab-based researchers within a department to complete their lab work while remaining socially distant. Where this is not possible, other control measures must be used. Departments have ‘COVID19 oversight’ management teams to receive feedback from the researchers to ensure procedures reflect their needs. My team have produced ‘return to work’ induction materials delivered via online learning platforms to ensure researchers are reassured that buildings are safe to return to, and to provide information on the new procedures for them and their colleagues to work safely. Face-to-face inductions and training are moving online which creates additional challenges. The next large piece of work for us is to support our colleagues in teaching to plan for lab practicals for returning students in October.

All areas of health and safety described in this book will be impacted by the reaction to the COVID19 crisis, those of us in health and safety operations are in a unique position to provide advice and support to many operational areas. The changes to our working practices and behaviours will be profound, but we hope that it will lead to improved communication and trust between health and safety advisers, academics and students. Then, no matter what the conditions, we will achieve a safe working environment and a healthy balance between work and home.

Research laboratories provide a unique environment of continually evolving work, varying levels of individual competence and increasingly shared workspaces between different projects and research groups. Health and safety management in research laboratories faces unique challenges to ensure that science and knowledge is advanced without being a barrier to scientific progress. Health and safety, rather than being a barrier, needs to be an enabler to these aims in these dynamic and challenging environments.

A recent review and critique of academic lab safety 1   highlights how little progress has been made over the past ten years to improve safety practices and culture in the academic environment. The aims of this book are to examine some of these challenges in detail, from the perspective of the health and safety practitioner, researcher and academic. This book is an analysis of health and safety management in the research laboratory environment across a broad spectrum of topics (predominantly within the university sector). As well as literature reviews and chapters on specific topics by individual experts we have revisited a survey, the results of which were first published in Nature. 2   It is interesting to note the differences seven years on and reflect on why these have occurred and, most importantly, what can be improved to support researchers and enable safe scientific progress.

What are the challenges that modern researchers face and how do these impact on safety culture and the implementation of a safety management system? Various barriers have been identified 2,3   or conjectured in previous studies. The shift in focus from theory, reflection and evolution of ideas to milestones, defined end points and real-world applications with monetary value has significantly changed the economic landscape at many universities. Academic and research careers are hard to achieve and maintain, with pressure from internal reviews, funding bodies, politicians, the public and business to ensure continual progress and value for money. Obtaining funding to do research is extremely competitive, even at the most prestigious institutions. Time is critical to ensuring work that is funded is then completed on time and within budget. Key stakeholders are the organisations hosting the research. They must ensure that their estates and infrastructure can keep pace with technical requirements, the need for flexible lab spaces and deliver a modern comfortable environment for study and work. The need for a physical space to be able to accommodate diverse research activities while achieving the lowest impact on the environment has never been greater, more challenging and expensive.

These factors have an impact on end user health and safety operations in various ways. From the need to ‘take a shortcut’ due to time pressure to meet a milestone, install an item of equipment in a less than optimal lab environment with insufficient cooling or extraction, to working in an overcrowded lab space. From the lab bench it can appear that the organisation or university is not managing its space with their scientific requirements or health and safety in mind, potentially leading to a poor relationship between researchers and ‘central services’ and poor safety culture. A recent review of what researchers think of the culture they work in by The Wellcome Trust 4   indicated that ‘their working culture is best when it is collaborative, inclusive, supportive and creative, when researchers are given time to focus on their research priorities, when leadership is transparent and open, and when individuals have a sense of safety and security’. But too often research culture is not ‘at its best’.

It is critical that health and safety in a research lab environment is practicable to those working in the labs and those that support the researchers (technicians, estates staff and contractors). Over the last 20 years there has been a definite shift of approach in health and safety from prescriptive top-down management to a consultative approach to facilitate this.

Team leaders are responsible for their group members and reliant on their PhD students, research assistants and postdoctoral researchers to ensure their projects are progressed. These individuals will have different technical competencies as well as different attitudes towards health and safety. Their previous training, either formal or informal will determine their personal attitudes and approach to safety in the lab environment. Those in the lab face the risks on a day-to-day basis and make critical decisions about risk based on their competence and the prevailing culture they are working in. They are constantly monitoring experiments and adjusting processes and procedures based on previous results. A key skill for researchers is to be able to identify when a risk has changed significantly and be able to either ask for help or devise a suitable control measure. How do researchers gain these skills? Is it trial and error? Or, is there a need to integrate risk, hazard and safety considerations into undergraduate degree courses formally and on a wider basis across the sector?

On a day-to-day basis, academic leaders are reliant on individual members of their research groups to ensure the work is done safely and the labs managed appropriately. The researchers are then reliant on the academic to continue to gain funding to continue research. This needs to be maintained to ensure work progresses, careers are successful and scientific knowledge improves. If the working environment is not optimal it is foreseeable that health and safety could be a secondary consideration and either ignored or bypassed.

The nature of cutting-edge research science in a multi-disciplinary setting (science, engineering and medicine) can lead to a focus by health and safety support services on bureaucratic solutions. This is driven by the regulatory landscape of the host country, and the need to comply with separate Regulations relating to individual hazards and risks. For example, in the UK a laboratory could be subject to multiple regulatory requirements depending on the hazards and risks they are dealing with. These hazards and risks are often fundamental to the research, restricting the ability to substitute hazards with those which are less hazardous. The lab worker normally experiences this as a large volume of paperwork, which from their perspective can be thought of as a barrier to completing research activity in a timely manner. The worker may perceive it as unhelpful and a way for the institution to ‘cover their own backs’. Chapter 2 of this book examines how these risks should be managed from a legal perspective to ensure that compliance and a safe working environment can be achieved.

Technology has reduced barriers to international communication, resulting in increased opportunities for research and collaboration. Scientific research groups are international in composition. Individuals not only bring their personal experiences and attitudes to the workplace but also their cultural influences. The short-term nature of most research contracts requires scientists to continually seek further employment, either at home or abroad, so these cultural influences on the approach to health and safety are a significant factor when assessing health and safety culture within the workplace.

On the other hand, technology, and specifically combined software solutions, do not appear to have been able to be fully utilised. The challenge of creating a flexible system of interactive online assessment forms, health and safety training records, computerised lab notebooks and health and safety management software is difficult to achieve across a large teaching and research organisation with multiple disciplines. The researcher is then confronted with a fragmented system within their organisation that can be inefficient and confusing.

Are health and safety practices in research laboratories less stringent than in other sectors? In a manufacturing environment, process-related safety rules are followed. These rules may seem to be excessive and are often criticised by safety professionals. 5   The impression is that industry and manufacturing have a tighter control of health and safety due to adherence to requirements set by quality control or safety management systems, fewer changes in established processes, strict policies related to employment, and are more sensitive to the financial impact of delays to business activities. In 2019 the ACS President Elect of the American Chemical Society (ACS) ran an initiative on collaborations and safety, specifically “Bridging the (Safety) Gap between Academia & Industry”. 6   As researchers move into industry and vice a versa there is an opportunity to identify what these differences are and whether they can be harnessed to improve safety culture in both sectors.

In 2013 Nature Journal published results from a survey among laboratory workers revealing that despite 86% of the scientists considering their lab to be “safe”, almost half of them had experienced work related injuries. 2   We have conducted a similar survey and collected 427 replies from mainly UK based researchers (but also from some US, EU and Asian organisations). Approximately a third of the responses were from students, the rest comprised of postdoctoral research assistants, research fellows, technicians and other support staff. Scientists within industrial research development were also represented ( Figure 1.1 ).

Representation of the responders of the survey by their position.

Representation of the responders of the survey by their position.

Like the 2013 survey, invitation to take part was by email and social media. Similarly, 86% of responders considered their lab as “safe” ( Figure 1.2 ). The percentage of responders who indicated they had experienced some injury was 35% in our survey (46% in the 2013 survey).

Perception of laboratory safety by the survey responders.

Perception of laboratory safety by the survey responders.

The most commonly occurring injuries are lacerations/cuts/bites, thermal burns and needle pricks ( Figure 1.3 ). In our survey, 14% of responders did not report their incidents to their supervisors. The willingness of an organisation to receive data on incidents is critical to establishing a good reporting culture. The organisation must review its resources for following up and closing out incidents. Clear guidance on what needs to be reported, as well as a simple, easy to use reporting mechanism is essential. Trained individuals completing the investigations, closing them out and identifying recommendations that can be implemented to reduce risks of reoccurrence are also a key factor. The research scientist needs to be reassured that if they do report an incident that it will be dealt with quickly and efficiently.

Types of injuries reported to be experienced by the survey responders.

Types of injuries reported to be experienced by the survey responders.

In 2013 40% of researchers admitted that they had not received suitable safety training. Our survey indicated that less than 5% of responders had not received training on specific hazards in their work. The survey did not attempt to identify how useful the responders found their health and safety training.

It was previously indicated that two thirds of British scientists were using formal risk assessment templates; our survey showed the use of formal organisational risk assessment templates to be 70% in this sample. However, it is worrying that 2% of responders admitted not assessing the risks, and 27% conducted informal risk assessments. Risk assessment is the cornerstone of health and safety in the UK so strategies for ensuring the process is understood and applied appropriately are essential.

Figure 1.4 represents the opinions of the responders to selected statements regarding safety culture. While 89% of responders agreed that “Safety is paramount and takes precedence over all other lab priorities”, almost one fifth of them also admitted that safety rules impact negatively on their productivity.

Responses to the selected statements about safety and its perception.

Responses to the selected statements about safety and its perception.

The majority of the responders admited that safety inspections improve safety compliance which is already known from other studies. 7   What is key is that the inspection process is perceived to be there for the health, safety and wellbeing of the researcher rather than institutional compliance. The majority of inspections are completed by health and safety officers, who can be seen as ‘outsiders’ 8   and therefore either not qualified or ‘safety police’, only listened to when in the lab. Some responders suggested increasing the number of inspections as a solution to improve safety in their lab. While this seems to be a logical suggestion, more inspections by safety officers, in our opinion, will not deliver the systemic improvements in lab safety that are needed. Current methods are taking a more collaborative approach, giving the responsibility for monitoring and inspecting to the researchers and their peers and ensuring that research leaders and senior management are taking part in the inspections with support from health and safety practitioners.

Of the respondents, 21% believed that they do not have any safety duties or were not sure what their safety duties are. At a time when health and safety in labs has a relatively high profile (due to serious incidents over the last 10 years) this is a worrying indication. Part of acting responsibly is to know what your responsibilities are. Then you can ensure your actions will not only keep you safe but also those around you. In the UK, the University Safety and Health Association (USHA) produced a Safety Leadership and Management Guidance document 9   for Higher Education Institutions (HEIs). This provided a template for all management and worker levels to understand their health and safety responsibilities. Potentially using this as a training tool, HEIs in the UK could improve individuals understanding of their health and safety responsibilities, depending on their position within the organisation. It is not currently possible to identify how many UK HEIs have provided training to not only senior management but all workers based on this document.

Almost one third of the responders for our survey were working in chemistry laboratories. Respondents from biological, physical and medical sciences also took part in the survey. Overall, we received a snapshot from experiences of workers from 17 disciplines, who worked in over 30 countries in many universities and research institutes.

We would echo the recent Nature Chemistry article 1   in which it is identified that to get more than ‘indications’ from these types of survey, health and safety practitioners and social scientists need to work together to devise suitable experiments and test hypotheses. Until then conclusions supported by data will not be possible.

The indicative responses we received have been collated into discreet categories, detailed below. Additionally, we collected the individual views on how safety could be improved at the end of this chapter in Appendix 1.

1.2.1 Category 1: Physical Barriers

Researchers identified that building infrastructure, ageing equipment, lack of appropriate equipment and space are serious barriers to working safely. Space constraints are often a reason why researchers neglect safety, particularly with the evolving nature of research work and research groups growing or moving in and out of universities on a regular basis. The work changes, but physical space does not. When new hazards are introduced this can result in engineering controls that are either too expensive (for example installation of a LEV system) or compromised to fit the space.

Lack of appropriate space also leads to overcrowded labs, inappropriate storage of reagents and waste, poor housekeeping and consequently more near-misses and accidents. The management of space and its contents is also an issue in research laboratories. Labs do not always have appointed managers or technical services to assist researchers in waste removal and housekeeping duties. These duties can often be neglected if the researchers are expected to complete these duties, partly due to a lack of time and partly due to attitude i.e. ‘I'm here to do research, not manage the lab on a day-to-day basis’. This is a persistent concern which does not have enough attention in the literature. In 2006 Francisco Javier Penas and others 10   described the implementation of industrial standards when designing and starting up a laboratory for chemical engineering teaching. Their experience proved to be a successful example of setting high safety expectations when assessing the risks from every point of view. The detailed design of the research labs and considerations when starting a new research site will be discussed in Chapters 12, 13 and 14.

The costs of clearance of legacy materials that have accumulated in a lab space can be considerable and will normally have to be paid for by the host department or School. In 2017–2018 when the Chemistry Department at Imperial College London relocated to a new building over 5 tonnes of chemicals were disposed of. Legacy material introduces increased risks associated with fire loading and takes up valuable working or storage space. Chapter 16 provides an insight into legacy materials and issues around old equipment and facilities.

1.2.2 Category 2: Economical Barriers

When responding to our survey researchers have blamed a lack of finances and limited funding streams for poor safety performance. Proposals are often submitted without consideration of what safety implications will arise if the grant is awarded and the work begins. Ideally a risk assessment of the work will be completed so that the physical spaces and engineering control measures can be designed in and costs identified at the earliest stage. As not all applications result in funding, there is limited appetite to spend a considerable amount of time detailing required safety infrastructure or ongoing requirements for each proposal submitted. However, if the application is successful, additional funds may be needed to ensure the required safety controls can be implemented. This can be significant sums of money. The funding bodies may assume (or require) that the organisation will cover the safety costs of a project via central funds. For example, if a scientific proposal involves work with high powered lasers, the UK Artificial Optical Radiation Regulations 2010 require engineering controls to be in place to prevent exposure to hazardous lasers. The costs for a system to achieve this can be significant. These costs will depend on several factors including:

What size is the space?

What are the existing services?

What new mechanical and engineering or electrical infrastructure will be required?

What interlocks, containment levels, safety protocols or licences does the research involve and what requirements or restrictions does that impose?

What furniture is required?

What equipment (if any) is to be included?

What level of professional fees will be required ( i.e. how much design will be required from architects, engineers, specialists etc. )?

If the funding body cannot fund the safety requirements the department or researcher must. This can lead to delays if the design assessment has not been done in advance of the work being funded. This is where safety requirements will be perceived as “barriers for effective work” and the organisation itself as “not supportive” as the funded work will not be possible to begin until it is safe to do so. It also places the safety officer or adviser in an awkward position as they could be pressured to ‘relax’ the rules or are perceived as barriers to effective research.

It is unfortunate that these economical barriers are not getting more attention in the literature. An individual approach may be needed for each organisation so that a process for efficiently identifying potential costs for new research can be established.

1.2.3 Category 3: Organisational Barriers

Our survey indicated that researchers are concerned by the lack of clear guidance, insufficient supervision and training, lack of accountability and a burgeoning bureaucracy. The reliance on documentation is perceived as a way for the organisation to reduce regulatory risks rather than as tools to aid the scientist and reduce the risks to themselves. The varied nature of work in a research laboratory and decentralised management of universities can exacerbate these issues. This can result in multiple documents from different parts of the organisation for the management of the same risk. This can lead to confusion or delays, particularly as the increase in multi-disciplinary work between departments, schools and laboratories continues. The lack of ease of access to electronic health and safety management systems in the research sector is a major problem for researchers, managers and health and safety practitioners. If the end user cannot easily find the correct documents or forms to complete easily, the researcher can be tempted to ignore the requirement.

A common criticism of health and safety management is that it is reliant on documents, rather than practicality. Researchers need to be able to access high quality training that reflects their type of work and be directly involved with decision making when it comes to the implementation of new policies or procedures. Researcher consultation takes time but will result in better practical solutions to safety issues and higher rates of compliance. Some organisations have instigated student-led organisations, 11–13   involving students in the management of safety 14,15   and developing specific safety training programmes (especially with practical components). 16–21   As noted in the recent Nature Chemistry article, there is a pressing need for more research on how to devise effective safety training, how to measure its impact and achieve improved safety attitudes, not only in the undergraduate teaching labs but in the research labs as well. 1   This is addressed in our book in the chapters dedicated to safety management of new sites (Chapter 9), spin-outs (Chapter 15) and training of safe chemists (Chapter 6) and generally throughout the university (Chapter 5).

Our ability to teach and educate new students on approaches to risk and to have a sensible view of risk is a key area that needs further development. The undergraduates of today are the researchers of tomorrow, so if safety culture is to improve further, training at this level is required. There will be benefits to integrating risk and safety management into undergraduate degree programmes. This would need to be carefully designed to be relevant to the field of study and connected to work that the student is undertaking. It should also form part of the marks associated with the work. For example, an MRes course director at the Imperial College London Department of Life Sciences introduced training in fieldwork risks and completion of a fieldwork risk assessment into their course. Students are provided with training and information and asked to write the assessment for their proposed fieldwork. The assessment is then marked according to specified marking criteria and provides up to 5% of the marks towards the student's degree. This incentive towards the final marks resulted in significant improvements in the assessment quality and the students’ feedback was very positive in terms of the learning outcomes and the skills gained for future employment. We are also seeing innovative approaches to teaching practical skills to students, for example, the ‘Chemical Kitchen’ is a part of the Imperial College London Pedagogy Transformation Project, 22   an interdisciplinary practical course that introduces students to the mindset and fundamental skills needed in a laboratory setting through a non-threatening parallel of cooking. It aims to teach practical laboratory skills, planning, creativity, safe working, precision, dexterity, making and recording observations, and the application of knowledge. Identifying opportunities for this type of learning and communicating safety knowledge to students in this manner increases the chances that key skills are learnt and embedded for future use. In this book, our authors provided insights into the teaching of students in Chapters 6 (Chemistry), 7 (Medicine) and 8 (outside the classroom).

Separately, a perceived lack of action on reported safety related infrastructure issues is highlighted in research institutions, particularly the university sector. Due to the complex nature of scientific buildings, an end user may not appreciate the complexity of fixing what appears a relatively simple issue. Feedback to end users on the current status of reported defects is critical to ensuring good communication between scientists and the estates team. Potentially delays in repairs to engineering controls (for example local exhaust ventilation systems) and therefore completion of experiments can increase risks if the experiments are conducted without the controls in place.

A successfully integrated safety programme has been reported that included institutional, administrative, and faculty efforts combined with an initiative from graduate and postdoctoral researchers. 21   However, there is a lack of successful documented examples on how these communication and collaborative networks can be achieved. Best practice examples in these areas would be a useful resource for research institutions to learn from.

Inevitably in the research lab there will be several rules for scientists to follow. In some cases, these rules are perceived as being prohibitive and overstated. For example, to comply with chemical storage requirements researchers will be required to store reagents in a dedicated location, not necessarily at their immediate work bench. If the reasons requiring the storage location are not made clear during training or induction the researcher may not follow the guidance, leading to a potentially hazardous situation.

Although discrete disciplines exist within a university setting, these lines are becoming blurred as more research funding focuses on interdisciplinary research and providing solutions to ‘real world issues’. This can result in researchers from one discipline, where they have achieved success in educational and research terms, to venture into another domain where their knowledge of the risks associated with this new area may not be so competent. This is particularly an issue in ‘hack spaces’ or ‘innovation spaces’ where the crossing over of different disciplines is desired. Health and safety considerations, lab design and how these areas are managed are critical to ensuring a safe working environment. These issues are explored in detail in Chapter 14 ‘Innovation Spaces – the new campus risk paradigm’.

The safety practitioner has a critical role to play in coordinating safety management systems and providing advice. The challenge is to provide advice on a range of subjects to meet the needs of researchers in the modern laboratory. Multiple hazards and risks may be present in any one laboratory. It is unlikely that any one individual can provide competent advice at a technical level on a wide range of hazards, for example, chemicals, lasers, ionising radiation, biological agents, machinery etc. This requires a collaborative approach to health and safety management in these types of situation. Scientists and technical staff have the relevant technical expertise and the safety practitioner then assists to guide them through the key concepts of safety and risk management. Unfortunately, the feedback received in our survey showed that researchers sometimes receive inconsistent safety advice and safety professionals themselves don't always lead by example. Clear feedback on safety issues from those advising helps ensure researchers can continue working safely and with minimal delays. The health and safety practitioner must understand their own limits of knowledge and competence and seek advice where it is lacking, or insufficient and know when to refer to other competent professionals. Part of the complexity for higher education institutions and research institutes is the size and locations of their sites. Many universities are on several different campuses, or sharing campuses with other organisations, for example medical campuses and the NHS in the UK. This makes planning for emergency responses more complicated. Specific considerations should be made to ensure all those who may need help can access it quickly and efficiently while ensuring the emergency services themselves can be guided to the required location, which on campuses with multiple entry points and buildings is not always clear. Liaising with emergency services is the subject of Chapter 11 of this book.

1.2.4 Category 4: Behavioural Barriers

Apathetic attitudes, carelessness, ignorance, work culture, cultural background, poor communication, overconfidence, lack of common sense, “old” habits and laziness were often named among factors negatively affecting research safety. A response from the survey was: “People don't realize how bad something can be until it really happens”. Researchers are often facing deadlines and may have to make a choice between productivity and safety. Much of the time the safety infringement will not result in an incident reinforcing the notion that safety is not required at that point in the experiment. Only when a combination of variables align will the incident occur. Behaviour in the lab setting must be led by the most experienced and senior managers. New members of a research group will generally replicate the behaviours they see around them. If that involves a lack of care when it comes to health and safety issues, this will in turn increase the risks of an incident occurring at some point in the future. Therefore, safety rules and procedures cannot be perceived as “unnecessary”, “childish”, and safety “micromanagement”.

Solutions to these issues rely on the safety practitioners ‘soft skills’ and ability to create collaborative teams across areas that they have no line management responsibility for. Improving communication of safety matters, 23   “embedding” a safety professional in high hazard department, 24   and following established guidance and recommendations 25–28   also are essential to improving safety culture. We could find limited documented evidence of implementation of a safety behaviour programme in a research environment. This is an area worthy of further study.

In this book we have several chapters written by non-UK collaborators. Research science and higher education establishments will often have high levels of international staff and students. Researchers will often move between different institutions and countries, and their attitudes or approaches to safety culture and processes will be imported to their host institution. Communication of local safety culture and expectations is critical in a higher education or research environment. Chapter 3 of our book examines this issue from a European perspective.

1.2.5 Category 5: Industry-specific Barriers

Due to the nature of the research work environment and the preference for shared lab areas, several simultaneous unrelated experiments may be occurring in any one lab area. The hazards and risks associated with these will also be varied, as well as the controls required to keep risk down as low as reasonably practicable. It is impossible to build a specific lab for every process, especially as the processes often change as the research evolves. New reagents are constantly being tested, novel compounds developed, and experiments being amended due to previous results and published research. Researchers claim that “it is often the case that the safest way to perform an operation is not particularly convenient, especially where a minor increase in risk yields a significant increase in efficiency”.

In the research environment, especially in universities, those in the lab and doing work may have the least amount of experience, for example PhD students and new postdoctoral researchers. They are often on short term contracts and under pressure to produce results to ensure their career can progress. The team leader will be a guiding role and will be available for advice but not generally in the lab with their staff and students. The tension between time required to complete study or work and safety rules creates pressure for those working at the lab bench to take short cuts when it comes to safety. The relatively high turnover of staff and students from these positions inevitably leads to research groups losing valuable experience and knowledge of safety matters. In our experience there is little evidence of teams having formal handovers of local safety information to new staff and students. The safety culture in any one research team is being undermined by the continual replacement of researchers. Even responsible researchers are struggling to pass on their knowledge when leaving to preserve the same level of safety awareness. Reducing the risks from this is difficult without having lab managers or technical staff to support the researchers and not only provide advice but also monitor safety procedures in the lab and ensure consistency of approach to lab rules that are in place over a long period of time. The constant turnover of lab staff and students also requires the institution to ensure its training and induction procedures are restated frequently to ensure new starters have the same information as those that came before them. Reiteration of safety training and providing clear and concise practical guidance will help to make work in the labs safe. However, nothing will work without the support of the supervisors and dedication of research and support staff. The organisation needs to be focused on safety and have a coherent plan and allocate enough resources to support the implementation and maintenance of safety. In our experiences the technical support teams within departments, schools or faculty provide an organisational memory and are often called upon to assist academics and teaching beyond their normal duties. They are often involved in training in equipment and procedures and have key skills that the research and teaching activities benefit from. The role of technical staff in maintaining good health and safety is the subject of Chapter 10.

One item that the university and research institutions should be leading on is how they can reduce their impact on the environment. Running science labs and supporting research and teaching is an energy hungry business and can have significant impacts on the environment if not suitably managed. Various national schemes are being implemented across the sector to provide incentives for improvements to sustainability and the environment. These issues are discussed in Chapter 17, ‘Green and Sustainable while avoiding risks’.

An area that has received more attention in the last five years is stress and wellbeing within the higher education sector. Several initiatives have been launched for not only students but also staff, including access to confidential care lines, designing work programmes and teaching to reduce risks of overwork, raising awareness related to mental health issues and encouraging individuals to seek help where needed. Mental health and other training programmes for managers, tutors and others have been instigated and broadly they appear to be providing support where needed. A report by Universities UK in 2018  29   recommended a ‘whole universities approach’ meaning that all aspects of university life promote and support student and staff mental health. Many organisations have invested in training for mental health first aiders and awareness campaigns, however changing the core systemic issues to reduce risks of stress and overwork for staff will require in depth analysis, management structures and review of resources. Chapter 4 looks at stress and workplace wellbeing in a Higher Education (HE) and Research establishment in more detail and provides insights on how this is being managed in some institutions.

Our book ends with a chapter titled ‘Organise not Agonise – Getting the Best from Audits and Inspections’. This chapter covers concerns, successes and causes of failures around auditing, starting with a focus on interfaces, where there is often uncertainty and lack of knowledge as to who is responsible or in control in a research or university environment. Such areas have been the cause of most health and safety management problems, and as such are generally the most fruitful for an auditor.

We hope the information contained in this book will be of interest to you and provide useful examples of how to approach certain issues within the research and higher education sector. Ideally, it will lead to greater discussion in these organisations at senior management level with Finance Officers, Human Resources and Safety Directors, about how to further improve safety performance. By putting these chapters together, we have learned a lot, and it is our wish that you do to.

The survey provided some interesting views on how safety could be improved in the research setting. These are summarised here:

Having a system where an individual requires retraining if they have been seen to use an unsafe method x number of times ( x can be varied depending on how common the technique is and how unsafe they're being). Similar to a ‘three strikes and you're out’ system.

Introducing a well-advertised (and adequate) safety upgrade funding scheme. This is infrastructure and can't be paid for, in the main, by research grants.

Centralising and digitalising health and safety associated paperwork.

Offering supervisors and managers more training into good management skills and how they need to balance managing experimental outcomes and workers mental and physical health. Often a culture prevails of pushing or demanding too much from their workforce, and this leads to mental health issues and lapses in health and safety.

Ensuring that senior research investigators visit their laboratory space at least twice a week. I know of one group that has received only two visits from their supervisor/research lead in one year!

Focussing on real risks, rather than perceived risk. A safety culture anchored in data and statistics would be very welcome.

Getting supervisors to visit the labs more often and to accept the word/guidance of technical staff.

Appointing informal safety officers (like fire wardens).

Having “Keep your lab tidy” campaigns.

Holding monthly updates on lab activity across the research group while paying close attention to any safety breaches.

Implementing visible sanctions for non-compliance (such as closing labs).

  Following on the last suggestion we also received a quote from one of the responders: “I would like to think health and safety could be improved by providing incentives but trying that I have achieved no tangible results in the past. Funny enough, it is by threatening disciplinary action that engages people more but for all the wrong reasons”. We hope the experiences shared in this book will help you to avoid situations where sanctions and disciplinary actions have to be implemented.

  • Campaigning and outreach
  • News and events
  • Awards and funding
  • Privacy policy
  • Journals and databases
  • Locations and contacts
  • Membership and professional community
  • Teaching and learning
  • Help and legal
  • Cookie policy
  • Terms and conditions
  • Get Adobe Acrobat Reader
  • Registered charity number: 207890
  • © Royal Society of Chemistry 2023

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

IOSH Magaazine logo

  • Visit IOSH Magazine on Facebook
  • Visit @ioshmagazine on Twitter
  • Visit IOSH Magazine on LinkedIn

Interview: Sir Cary Cooper

  • Sickness absence
  • Accident reduction
  • Behavioural safety
  • Control of contractors
  • Migrant workers
  • Older workers
  • Safe systems of work
  • Young workers
  • Employee involvement
  • Management systems
  • Emergency planning
  • Corporate governance
  • Performance/results
  • Regulation/enforcement
  • Human capital and Vision Zero
  • Drugs and alcohol
  • Mental health
  • Manual handling
  • Hazardous substances
  • Electricity
  • Slips and trips
  • Road safety
  • Work at height
  • Confined spaces
  • Lifting operations
  • Lone workers
  • Personal protective equipment
  • Violence at work
  • Work equipment
  • Workplace transport
  • Communication
  • Career development
  • Competencies
  • Personal development
  • Qualifications
  • Professional skills
  • Achieving Fellowship
  • Stakeholder management
  • Future Leaders
  • Transport and logistics
  • Third sector
  • Mining and quarrying
  • Personal injury
  • Return to work
  • Manufacturing and engineering
  • Construction
  • Sector: Northern Ireland
  • Sector: Midland
  • Sector: Merseyside
  • Sector: Manchester and North West Districts
  • Sector: Ireland East
  • Sector: Ireland
  • Sector: Edinburgh
  • Sector: Desmond-South Munster
  • Sector: Qatar
  • Sector: Oman
  • Sector: South Coast
  • Sector: South Wales
  • Sector: Thames Valley
  • Sector: Tyne and Wear
  • Sector: UAE
  • Sector: West of Scotland
  • Sector: Yorkshire
  • Sector: Fire
  • Sector: Financial/general services
  • Sector: Energy
  • Sector: Communications and media
  • Sector: Central government
  • Catering and leisure
  • Agriculture and forestry
  • Sector: Local government
  • Sector: Financial Services
  • Sector: Sports Grounds and Events
  • Rural industries
  • Sector: railway
  • Public Services
  • Sector: Offshore
  • Sector: Hazardous Industries
  • Sector: Food and Drink
  • Sector: Fire Risk Management
  • Sector: Aviation and Aerospace
  • IOSH Magazine Issues
  • Nov/Dec 2023

HSE’s Annual Report highlights evaluation strategy to assess regulator’s ill-health interventions

Woodworker with bad back - Credit: iStock

The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is developing an ‘iterative evaluation strategy’ so it can assess the impact its interventions are having on improving rates of ill health in the workplace.

Highlighted in the HSE’s Annual Report and Accounts 2022/23, and designed to understand and analyse work-related ill-health incidence, the strategy will link data between a range of datasets and organisations, which the regulator can use to provide a ‘richer evidence base’ of the impact its work has.

As the annual report notes, the HSE has continued its focus on tackling occupational lung disease, musculoskeletal disorders and work-related stress, the three main causes of work-related ill health.

The OSH regulator has agreed that it will use ‘micro and activity level metrics to demonstrate where interventions have an impact on duty-holder behaviour

According to Labour Force Survey data, there were 1.8 million work-related ill-health cases (new or longstanding) in 2021/22. Estimates based on the HSE’s cost model suggest that in 2019/20, the annual cost of new cases of ill health, excluding long latency illness such as cancer, was £11.2bn.

Reducing work-related ill health is one of the HSE’s five objectives as outlined in its 10-year strategy, Protecting People and Places: HSE Strategy 2022-2032 and the OSH regulator has agreed that it will use ‘micro and activity level metrics to demonstrate where interventions have an impact on duty-holder behaviour’.

A number of initiatives are highlighted in the report, which covers the period 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023.

One is a collaborative research programme on stress that is based around the model of the National Core Study on Covid. This draws on the input of nationally-recognised experts who are leading research in their own organisation while also taking advantage of the HSE’s latest emerging science and evidence.

The HSE’s report also provides an update on its Working Minds campaign, launched more than a year ago to improve knowledge around work-related stress.

Over the past year, the HSE says it has expanded the number of key partner organisations from five to 20, including IOSH. The regulator has also developed a network of more than 1,000 Working Mind champions who, the HSE says, are providing employers and workers with the information they need to control and prevent the risks that cause work-related stress.

The HSE has also continued its work to reduce exposure to carcinogens and other substances that are harmful to lung health at work in an effort to reduce the 12,000 annual lung disease deaths that are estimated to be linked to past exposures.

In this area, for example, the regulator conducted around 5,000 visits to construction, woodworking, fabricated steel, foundry, stone working and brick manufacture and cutting industries in 2022/23.

As the report notes, ‘Inspectors took enforcement action on significant levels of uncontrolled risk found in more than two-thirds of the premises visited.’

In particular, the HSE reported significant issues in the control of wood dust. During 2022/23, inspectors served 1,252 enforcement notices, the report reveals, including 900 for failure to adequately control exposure. This was due to a number of reasons, including poor housekeeping and dry sweeping of the wood dust, poor maintenance and lack of thorough examination of local exhaust ventilation and inadequate provision of respiratory protective equipment.

We’ve invested significant effort in evolving our regulatory processes to ensure our focus remains on tackling high-risk activities efficiently and effectively, enabling us to reprioritise resource across our strategic objectives

The HSE says that the findings will inform further inspections planned for 2023/24.

The report also notes that previous inspection campaigns found significant levels of uncontrolled risk in relation to the control of welding fumes and metalworking fluids.

In 2022/23, inspectors visited more than 600 sites and served more than 786 enforcement notices, primarily for failure to control worker exposure to metalworking fluid mist and welding fumes.

‘Poor compliance in controlling exposure to metalworking fluid mist was found to be with failure to fit extraction to control mists on computerised numerical control machinery, inadequate fluid quality checks on water-based metal working fluids and lack of health surveillance for occupational asthma and dermatitis,’ the report says.

Elsewhere, one of the biggest developments in 2022/23 was the setting up of the new Building Safety Regulator (BSR). On 22 March this year, the BSR held its inaugural conference, which particularly focused on the practical steps that the construction industry will need to take in the year ahead.

While reducing work-related ill health remains a major HSE focus, the report also highlights the regulator’s success in maintaining Great Britain’s record as one of the safest countries to work in, whether that was through successful prosecutions or proactive inspections (see box below).

As Sarah Newton, HSE chair, and Sarah Albon, HSE chief executive and accounting officer, noted in the report’s summary: ‘2022/23 was the foundational year of our strategy, Protecting People and Places, and has seen strong performance including delivery of over 90% of our Business Plan commitments.

‘We’ve invested significant effort in evolving our regulatory processes to ensure our focus remains on tackling high-risk activities efficiently and effectively, enabling us to reprioritise resource across our strategic objectives.’

HSE achievements in 2022/23 include:

  • Investigated more than 230 fatal and 5,500 non-fatal incidents and completed 86% of fatal investigations within 12 months of receiving primacy against its target of 80%.  
  • Completed 216 criminal prosecutions with a 94% conviction rate.  
  • Delivered more than 16,800 proactive inspections, which included a programme of high-risk interventions.   
  • In construction, delivered 2,348 inspections under a major health campaign focusing on the main causes of ill-health – dust (including asbestos), musculoskeletal problems, and stress.  
  • Two enforcement-led health campaigns – one on the control of hazardous dusts and another on moving and handling material.

Source: HSE's Annual Report and Accounts

IOSH Nov_Dec cover.png

  • UK government mandates second staircases in high-rise new builds
  • Network Rail fined £6.7m over Stonehaven rail crash fatalities
  • Disabled employees continue to struggle at work despite improvements, survey finds

You may also be interested in...

web 3-firefighters credit iStock-473421910 (1).png - Credit: web 3-firefighters credit iStock-473421910 (1).png

  HSE investigates new breathing apparatus policy after fire union raises safety concerns

Waving business people - Credit: iStock

  IOSH Council Election now open

Farmers-boots - Credit: iStock

  Failure to arrange OH assessment sees employer lose unfair dismissal case

COPFS Road chipper.jpg - Credit: COPFS Road chipper.jpg

  LA fined after worker's arm trapped by road chipper

Thurlow Educational Trust press release picture 4.png - Credit: Thurlow Educational Trust press release picture 4.png

  £80,000 fine for prep school after classroom ceiling collapse

web-X-ray-of-a-lunge-Cancer-iStock-115202490.jpg - Credit: web-X-ray-of-a-lunge-Cancer-iStock-115202490.jpg

  Climate-change: workers need clean air

View the discussion thread.

Safety Delta Netherlands

Plant Ageing Study, Phase 1 Report, Research Report RR823, Health and Safety Executive (HSE), United Kingdom, 2010

Between 1996 and 2008 it is estimated that there have been 173 loss of containment incidents reported in RIDDOR that can be attributable to ageing plant. This represents 5.5% of all loss of containment events. The limited information provided in RIDDOR about the underlying causes means that it is difficult to identify which events may be age related: the actual number could be much higher than that quoted here. Across Europe, between 1980 and 2006, it is estimated that there have been 96 incidents reported in the MARS database relating to major accident potential loss of containment which are estimated to be due to ageing plant. This represents 28% of all reported 'major accident' loss of containment events in the MARS database and equates to an overall loss of 11 lives ,183 injuries and over 170Million € of economic loss. As the MARS data provides the more detailed and comprehensive insight into the incidents and causal factors and is specifically related to potential major accident hazard events, it is considered that this represents a more realistic indication of the extent and severity of ageing plant and its contribution to major accidents. This leads to the conclusion that ageing plant is a significant issue. Onshore chemical plant in the UK is ageing. Health and Safety Executive (HSE) field inspectors often have to consider the Operators' safety justification for continued use of ageing plant taking account of a variety of issues such as usage, design life, known research, known operational and failure history, maintenance and inspection history, etc. The issues also need to be considered against a background of increasing competition from overseas, and the pressure on resources and investment which this has had over recent years, with reductions in manning levels, early retirement of experienced staff, and pressure on operating budgets.

Significance score:

2010 report that first pointed to the challenges associated with ageing assets

Target Group(s):

  • HSE managers
  • Operational leadership
  • Strategic leadership
  • Supervisors

Risk Theme:

  • Process Safety - Asset Integrity Management - General

hse research report 509

Knowledge centre

hse research report 509

HSE | Research & Development

  • What is Research?‏‏‎
  • Data Protection
  • Data Sources
  • Cookie Policy
  • Research Ethics
  • Research Integrity
  • European Funding
  • Clinical Trials
  • Research Dissemination, Translation & Impact
  • Patient and Public Involvement in Research (PPI)
  • R&D Publications
  • Join R&D Mailing List

Ethical Approval for Research in the HSE & its funded organisations

Research Ethics Committees (RECs) are a fundamental part of the process of the governance of health research. The role of RECs is to protect the safety, welfare, and rights of participants in health research.

RECs are responsible for ensuring research adheres to high quality ethical standards and that appropriate informed and explicit consent for health and social care research is obtained, recorded and retained. They provide an independent assessment of all ethical considerations of a research study before it can commence. They are also responsible for ongoing oversight of research studies when amendments or changes to the original protocol or other relevant study documentation are required, or when safety issues arise.

The HSE research ethics committee landscape is in the process of being reformed in order to establish a cohesive and sustainable approach to research ethics review.

You may also find it helpful to refer to our Frequently Asked Questions page

On this page

Projects that require approval by a hse/hospital research ethics committee, finding the correct rec for a research project, what documentation is required for rec submission, resources and support for applicants, resources and support for hse/hospital research ethics committees, roadmap for the reform of the health service recs system, what is the difference between the various recs, are you interested in becoming a member of a hse reference rec.

A research project requires approval by a HSE/Hospital Research Ethics Committee when the following applies:

  • It is a health research project.
  • which recruit participants via the HSE health service users, and/or their personal data and/or their biological samples
  • which involve the participation of health or social care staff or require HSE healthcare services, premises, or infrastructure.
  • It is research outside the scope of the National Office for Research Ethics Committees (NREC) . This includes non-regulated clinical trials etc.

Note that if you are carrying out research as part of an academic qualification or are an academic member of staff, your project may also require academic REC approval.

Under NO circumstances should a research study requiring HSE/Hospital REC or National Research Ethics Committee approval go ahead without it.

Other activities, such as clinical audits, standard service evaluations and quality improvement projects, statutory public health work or advanced health analytics routinely carried out by the HSE for the planning and delivery of health and social health care services, are outside the scope of the research framework and do not require research ethical approval. However, in certain instances, ethical oversight outside the remit of the REC maybe required for such activities and this can be provided by a variety of mechanisms in accordance with the local governance requirement of each service.

When ethical oversight is deemed necessary but no other arrangement for ethical governance exist at local level, the relevant REC may agree to review the activity. In these cases it is recommended that the REC membership includes members with expertise in such types of activities. A checklist [Download Word] can be used to determine whether ethical oversight is required.

Further useful information is available in the Guide to managing ethical issues in quality improvement or clinical audit projects published by the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership in the UK.

Clinical Trials for Investigational Medicinal Products (CT-IMPs) and Clinical Investigations with Medical Devices hosted by HSE or HSE funded services need to be approved by the National Office for Research Ethics Committee (NREC) . The NREC can provide single approval even if the study involves multiple sites.

All other studies need to be approved by the HSE/Hospital REC that is responsible for the site hosting the research, as follows:

  • Studies hosted by community based healthcare services
  • Studies hosted by hospital based healthcare services
  • Studies hosted by Corporate Divisions and National Services
  • Studies hosted by General Practitioners (GP)
  • Studies hosted by Tusla, Child and Family Agency

At present studies involving multiple healthcare sites require multiple REC approvals with the exception of Clinical Trials for Investigational Medicinal Products (CT-IMPs) and Clinical Investigations with Medical Devices. HSE R&D is leading a program of reform to address this problem with a view to enable single REC approval by 2023.

REC submissions include a completed REC application form and other additional documentation.

Most HSE/Hospital RECS use the REC Standard Application form , but you should check the relevant REC website or administrator before applying.

In addition to the REC Standard Application form , other documentation you will need to submit depends on the type of study and you can download a check list to help you plan your submission. 

It may include:

  • Proof of Insurance
  • Study Protocol
  • Summary CV for Principal Investigator (two pages only)
  • Material that will be shared with the prospective participant
  • Research Participant Information Leaflet
  • Research Participant Consent Form
  • Research Participant Assent Form
  • Letter of Invitation for participant
  • Cover letter on headed paper
  • Case Report Form
  • If the study involves a questionnaire:
  • Validated Questionnaire
  • Non-validated Questionnaire
  • Interview schedule
  • Any other written materials provided to the participant e.g. participant diary
  • Copies of recruitment material for research participants, e.g. posters, newspaper adverts, website where appropriate, a printed script for video or audio recordings
  • Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) scoring tool (XLSX / 263 KB)

Download Checklist for HSE Reference Research Ethics Committees (Word / 108KB)

  • Information on Consent:  Consent for research
  • Research ethics application: A guide for the novice researcher

Resources and support for the HSE and Hospital Research Ethics Committees is available via the HSE National REC Support and Coordination Office.

The HSE is in the process of reforming the health RECs system . The reform will result in the establishment of six regional RECs aligned to the Sláintecare regional health areas .  These RECs are called HSE Reference RECs and they will follow a Standard Code of Governance and Management ,  report to the National HSE Committee for the Governance, Management and Support of Research and are supported by the National REC Support and Coordination Office .

There are several types of research ethics committees within the public health service:

  • Hospital RECs: They review applications for research only involving the hospital site.
  • Regional HSE RECs: They provide a service to several healthcare services (community and hospital based) within a regional area.
  • The National Office for Research Ethics Committees (NREC) is a statutory REC under the auspices of the Department of Health, responsible for providing a single REC opinion for regulated clinical trials and investigations of medical devices.
  • The ICPG REC review research applications from General Practitioners nationwide.
  • Academic RECs are responsible for REC approval of research projects taking place for an academic qualification or by an academic member of staff undertaking the project under the auspices of the university. Academic REC approval is part of the third level education approval processes and at the moment is required in addition to HSE/Hospital REC approval for relevant projects .

The roadmap for the reform of the HSE REC system envisages the establishment of processes to enable a single REC approval for projects involving multiple sites. Until the roadmap is implemented, (non-regulated) studies involving multiple sites still require multiple REC approvals.

If you are interested in becoming a member of a HSE Reference REC , find out more about what it involves, what is in it for you and how to express an interest.

updated 07/11/22

Privacy Overview

Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.

University of Pennsylvania

  • Appointments

Career Fairs

  • Resume Reviews

Penn Career Services

  • Undergraduates
  • PhDs & Postdocs
  • Faculty & Staff
  • Prospective Students
  • Online Students
  • Career Champions
  • I’m Exploring
  • Architecture & Design
  • Education & Academia
  • Engineering
  • Fashion, Retail & Consumer Products
  • Fellowships & Gap Year
  • Fine Arts, Performing Arts, & Music
  • Government, Law & Public Policy
  • Healthcare & Public Health
  • International Relations & NGOs
  • Life & Physical Sciences
  • Marketing, Advertising & Public Relations
  • Media, Journalism & Entertainment
  • Non-Profits
  • Pre-Health, Pre-Law and Pre-Grad
  • Real Estate, Accounting, & Insurance
  • Social Work & Human Services
  • Sports & Hospitality
  • Startups, Entrepreneurship & Freelancing
  • Sustainability, Energy & Conservation
  • Technology, Data & Analytics
  • DACA and Undocumented Students
  • First Generation and Low Income Students
  • International Students
  • LGBTQ+ Students
  • Transfer Students
  • Students of Color
  • Students with Disabilities
  • Explore Careers & Industries
  • Make Connections & Network
  • Search for a Job or Internship
  • Write a Resume/CV
  • Write a Cover Letter
  • Engage with Employers
  • Research Salaries & Negotiate Offers
  • Find Funding
  • Develop Professional and Leadership Skills
  • Apply to Graduate School
  • Apply to Health Professions School
  • Apply to Law School
  • Self-Assessment
  • Experiences
  • Post-Graduate
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Career Fairs
  • For Employers
  • Meet the Team
  • Peer Career Advisors
  • Social Media
  • Career Services Policies
  • Walk-Ins & Pop-Ins
  • Strategic Plan 2022-2025

Researching Law Schools: Harnessing the Power of ABA 509 Reports

  • Share This: Share Researching Law Schools: Harnessing the Power of ABA 509 Reports on Facebook Share Researching Law Schools: Harnessing the Power of ABA 509 Reports on LinkedIn Share Researching Law Schools: Harnessing the Power of ABA 509 Reports on X

Are you a pre-law student who is in the process of applying to law school, but not sure how get started with compiling your school list? 

Digging deeper into individual law schools’ websites is a good start, but it can be difficult to find the information you need to make an informed decision. This is where the ABA 509 reports come in! 

What are the ABA 509 reports? 

The ABA Standard 509 reports are submitted by accredited law schools to the ABA (American Bar Association) each year. They contain detailed information about each law school’s admitted class, such as the acceptance rate, 75/50/25 percentiles of admitted students’ LSAT/GPA/GRE* (*if the law school accepts GRE scores), and much more. 

You can find the 509 reports on the ABA’s website  here . To view a law school’s 509 report for a given year, select the year and school from the drop-down list. The report will be generated as a downloadable PDF. 

What information should I keep an eye out for? 

  • First Year Class 

This information is displayed on the first page of the report and contains the key admissions statistics that most prospective students want to know: What are the 75/50/25 percentile GPA and LSAT scores? What is the acceptance rate? How many students matriculated?

Knowing this, you will be able to identify which percentile your GPA and LSAT score would be at a given school, which allows you to determine the baseline competitiveness of your application. However, law schools perform a holistic review and these numbers are not the end-all-be-all of your admissions odds.  

  • Race and Gender

You can view the race and gender data for L1, L2, and L3 students in a separate table below the First Year Class data. This information is self-reported by the applicants. The column abbreviations represent: T = Total, M = Men, W = Women, AGI = Additional Gender Identity, PNR = Prefer Not to Respond. 

You can also view similar data for the school’s faculty. While this section is not as comprehensive as the student data, it can still provide a snapshot into the diversity of a law school’s faculty – the numbers of male/female, people of color, and full time/non-full-time faculty members are visible.  

  • Tuition and Fees, Living Expenses, & Grants and Scholarships

While these tables are separate, they all provide valuable insight into a school’s affordability, particularly the grants and scholarships section. You can view the total number of grant recipients, along with the number of students whose funding covers less than half, half to full, and full tuition costs. You can also see the 75/50/25 percentile grant amounts. Note that need-based aid is not included here. 

These financial sections can help you understand a law school’s scholarship and grant funding structure, your chances of earning a scholarship, and the amount you may receive. After acceptance, you can use this data to determine if you received a competitive scholarship offer from a given school.  

Toward the bottom of the report, you’ll see the attrition data presented in the same format as the race and gender data. Hopefully, for your top school, this area will be full of zeroes! A high attrition rate can be a red flag. 

Attrition is separated into two categories: academic and other. Academic attrition refers to students who discontinued their law education while they were not in good academic standing. The other category is a catch-all for students who discontinued their law education for reasons unrelated to their academic standing, transferring, or taking a leave of absence for 1 year or less. 

In this table, you can view the number of students who transferred in and out during a given year. This can be helpful to know, since a high number of transfers out can potentially mean that students are unhappy with their experience. 

While these numbers can serve as a useful starting point, we encourage prospective applicants to research law programs of interest on a deeper level (such as through attending open houses, info sessions, and campus visits) to determine if a school is a good fit for their personal and professional goals.

' src=

Read our research on: Immigration & Migration | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

4. in their own words: americans’ concerns, feelings about u.s.-mexico border situation.

When asked in an open-ended question about their top concerns regarding the large number of migrants seeking to enter the U.S. at the border with Mexico, the most commonly cited concerns relate either to the economic costs and burdens associated with the migration surge or concerns about security (22% of concerns fall into each of these categories).

About one-in-ten adults (11%) express concern for migrants’ safety and treatment. Smaller shares raise other concerns.

Chart shows Americans commonly cite economic, security concerns over situation at U.S. border with Mexico

Economic burdens

  • Those that express economic concerns mainly mention strains on health care services and welfare. Some also point to the unfair impact on American taxpayers.
  • 3% offer that they are concerned about migrants taking jobs from Americans.

Security concerns

  • 10% say they are concerned about increasing crime rates, while an identical share mention the possibility of criminals or terrorists entering the country due to insufficient vetting.

Migrant safety, treatment

  • Among the 11% of adults who say migrants’ treatment is their top concern, 3% each cite poor conditions for those arriving at the U.S. border or concern for their safety . And 1% mention migrants’ general well-being.

Other major concerns

  • Other concerns mentioned by Americans included logistical concerns about where to house migrants (5%) and belief that migrants are abusing the system (5%).
  • 4% remark that the sheer volume of migrants attempting to enter the U.S. is a major concern, while 5% offer more broadly that the immigration and asylum systems are broken.

Partisans differ in their concerns about influx of migrants at U.S.-Mexico border

Republicans and Democrats mention different considerations when asked about their top concerns related to the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border.

Chart shows Republicans, Democrats have differing top concerns about the migration surge at the U.S.-Mexico border

Republicans are more likely than Democrats to mention issues related to the economy or border security. Democrats are more likely to express concerns about migrants’ safety and wellbeing.

Among Republicans – who are more likely to offer a response to this question than Democrats – concerns about security are mentioned frequently (36%). Democrats are far less likely to cite a security concern (10%).

There is a somewhat smaller partisan gap in how often concerns about economic costs related to an influx of migrants come up: 31% of Republicans mention concerns related to the economy, as do 17% of Democrats.

Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to say their top concern is for the treatment, security and well-being of migrants attempting to enter the U.S. (19% vs. 3%, respectively).

What else do Americans want to share about their views on immigration?

Chart showing Americans' responses to an open-ended question about their thoughts on immigration

In a separate open-ended question – which asked Americans to write any other thoughts they had about immigration – 45% offered a response while more than half skipped the question. Republicans were more likely than Democrats to take this opportunity to share additional thoughts (55% vs. 37%, respectively).

These responses vary widely, with many people mentioning multiple considerations in their responses.

For example, one respondent says, “It would be great if we could take everyone in, but we can’t. The border needs to be secure and securing it a top priority. Those arriving at the border attempting to cross must be treated with care and compassion and a bipartisan solution needs to be found.”

Some mention a desire for immigration policies to be more restrictive (8%), often citing concerns about the volume of people attempting to enter or the need for more selectivity about who is allowed to stay.

  • One person offers that “we need to slam the door on immigration now just to give us time to develop a proper and competent system for dealing with it, because we don’t have that now.”

A similar share writes about the need to address the immediate crisis through additional resources to border states or taking steps to secure the border more generally (7%).

  • One person responds: “[We] need to secure the border and increase budgets for customs to process these migrants properly. They can work if they pay taxes and go through [the] system to become citizens. But we need to overhaul the system first.”

Others take the opportunity to share their own positive views of immigrants (5%) or mention the need for support for migrants (4%).

  • One person writes, “Immigrants are an essential part of the United States’ history and future. Politicians and the media have made them out to be villains, but they are a part of the U.S. fabric.”
  • From another respondent: “America should be honored that so many people want to come here. We should do what we can to support and foster immigrants’ integration into American society.”

Sizable shares talk about how the system overall is broken and needs fixing (6%) or that politicians purposefully use the issue to gain partisan advantage (5%).

  • One person writes, “Congress has been kicking the can down the road for years. No one group wants to lose political capital by actually doing something concrete and credible with this issue.”

Sign up for our Politics newsletter

Sent weekly on Wednesday

Report Materials

Table of contents, fast facts on how greeks see migrants as greece-turkey border crisis deepens, americans’ immigration policy priorities: divisions between – and within – the two parties, from the archives: in ’60s, americans gave thumbs-up to immigration law that changed the nation, around the world, more say immigrants are a strength than a burden, latinos have become less likely to say there are too many immigrants in u.s., most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .

  • Skip to main content
  • Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Shots - Health News

  • Your Health
  • Treatments & Tests
  • Health Inc.
  • Public Health

Reproductive rights in America

Research at the heart of a federal case against the abortion pill has been retracted.

Selena Simmons-Duffin

Selena Simmons-Duffin

hse research report 509

The Supreme Court will hear the case against the abortion pill mifepristone on March 26. It's part of a two-drug regimen with misoprostol for abortions in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images hide caption

The Supreme Court will hear the case against the abortion pill mifepristone on March 26. It's part of a two-drug regimen with misoprostol for abortions in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy.

A scientific paper that raised concerns about the safety of the abortion pill mifepristone was retracted by its publisher this week. The study was cited three times by a federal judge who ruled against mifepristone last spring. That case, which could limit access to mifepristone throughout the country, will soon be heard in the Supreme Court.

The now retracted study used Medicaid claims data to track E.R. visits by patients in the month after having an abortion. The study found a much higher rate of complications than similar studies that have examined abortion safety.

Sage, the publisher of the journal, retracted the study on Monday along with two other papers, explaining in a statement that "expert reviewers found that the studies demonstrate a lack of scientific rigor that invalidates or renders unreliable the authors' conclusions."

It also noted that most of the authors on the paper worked for the Charlotte Lozier Institute, the research arm of anti-abortion lobbying group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, and that one of the original peer reviewers had also worked for the Lozier Institute.

The Sage journal, Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology , published all three research articles, which are still available online along with the retraction notice. In an email to NPR, a spokesperson for Sage wrote that the process leading to the retractions "was thorough, fair, and careful."

The lead author on the paper, James Studnicki, fiercely defends his work. "Sage is targeting us because we have been successful for a long period of time," he says on a video posted online this week . He asserts that the retraction has "nothing to do with real science and has everything to do with a political assassination of science."

He says that because the study's findings have been cited in legal cases like the one challenging the abortion pill, "we have become visible – people are quoting us. And for that reason, we are dangerous, and for that reason, they want to cancel our work," Studnicki says in the video.

In an email to NPR, a spokesperson for the Charlotte Lozier Institute said that they "will be taking appropriate legal action."

Role in abortion pill legal case

Anti-abortion rights groups, including a group of doctors, sued the federal Food and Drug Administration in 2022 over the approval of mifepristone, which is part of a two-drug regimen used in most medication abortions. The pill has been on the market for over 20 years, and is used in more than half abortions nationally. The FDA stands by its research that finds adverse events from mifepristone are extremely rare.

Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, the district court judge who initially ruled on the case, pointed to the now-retracted study to support the idea that the anti-abortion rights physicians suing the FDA had the right to do so. "The associations' members have standing because they allege adverse events from chemical abortion drugs can overwhelm the medical system and place 'enormous pressure and stress' on doctors during emergencies and complications," he wrote in his decision, citing Studnicki. He ruled that mifepristone should be pulled from the market nationwide, although his decision never took effect.

hse research report 509

Matthew Kacsmaryk at his confirmation hearing for the federal bench in 2017. AP hide caption

Matthew Kacsmaryk at his confirmation hearing for the federal bench in 2017.

Kacsmaryk is a Trump appointee who was a vocal abortion opponent before becoming a federal judge.

"I don't think he would view the retraction as delegitimizing the research," says Mary Ziegler , a law professor and expert on the legal history of abortion at U.C. Davis. "There's been so much polarization about what the reality of abortion is on the right that I'm not sure how much a retraction would affect his reasoning."

Ziegler also doubts the retractions will alter much in the Supreme Court case, given its conservative majority. "We've already seen, when it comes to abortion, that the court has a propensity to look at the views of experts that support the results it wants," she says. The decision that overturned Roe v. Wade is an example, she says. "The majority [opinion] relied pretty much exclusively on scholars with some ties to pro-life activism and didn't really cite anybody else even or really even acknowledge that there was a majority scholarly position or even that there was meaningful disagreement on the subject."

In the mifepristone case, "there's a lot of supposition and speculation" in the argument about who has standing to sue, she explains. "There's a probability that people will take mifepristone and then there's a probability that they'll get complications and then there's a probability that they'll get treatment in the E.R. and then there's a probability that they'll encounter physicians with certain objections to mifepristone. So the question is, if this [retraction] knocks out one leg of the stool, does that somehow affect how the court is going to view standing? I imagine not."

It's impossible to know who will win the Supreme Court case, but Ziegler thinks that this retraction probably won't sway the outcome either way. "If the court is skeptical of standing because of all these aforementioned weaknesses, this is just more fuel to that fire," she says. "It's not as if this were an airtight case for standing and this was a potentially game-changing development."

Oral arguments for the case, Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. FDA , are scheduled for March 26 at the Supreme Court. A decision is expected by summer. Mifepristone remains available while the legal process continues.

  • Abortion policy
  • abortion pill
  • judge matthew kacsmaryk
  • mifepristone
  • retractions
  • Abortion rights
  • Supreme Court
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to FDA Search
  • Skip to in this section menu
  • Skip to footer links

U.S. flag

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

  •   Search
  •   Menu
  • FDA Organization
  • Oncology Center of Excellence
  • OCE Annual Reports
  • 2023 OCE Annual Report

Oncology Research and Development 2023

AR 2023 Research Yellow

Project Catalyst

Oce scientific collaborative, project significant.

In 2023, OCE’s Project Catalyst provided guidance and expanded the educational resources available to small pharmaceutical companies and academic life science incubators to support informed anticancer therapy development, including:

  • Discussions with Academic Accelerator Life Science Hubs to include the Pennsylvania Vagelos Life Science & Management Program, and Harvard University.
  • New Bench to Bedside Chats included discussions on: Expedited Programs for Serious Conditions––Drugs and Biologics; and currently in development First in Human-Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls (CMC) considerations for Phase 1 CMC Guidance.
  • Developed plans for a 2024 workshop with FDA CDER SBIA and NCI SBIR to produce a webinar aimed at companies involved in the SBIR CARES program as well as academic accelerators and small start-up companies regarding FDA Interactions and functions.
  • Collaborated with the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, and FDA Oncology Pediatric and Rare Tumors Programs to hold a public meeting, “Development of a Public Private Partnership Developing Anti-Cancer Therapies for Ultra-Rare Tumor Indications.” This virtual meeting on August 24, 2023, discussed plans for the creation of a public-private partnership to guide and support development of new drugs for the treatment of patients with ultra-rare cancers. Discussions included an envisioned framework for a collaborative open-science, open-drug development process designed to develop candidate targeted drugs for specific rare cancer indications. FNIH solicited feedback from the scientific community and patient advocate groups on the proposed plans.
  • Educational initiatives included the following conferences, presentations and working groups: DIA China Presentation, FDA’s Rare Disease Day Presentation, the Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy and Friends of Cancer Research regarding Potential CRIPSR Screens as Phase 1 studies for CAR-T and Synthetic TCR approaches, An AACR Annual Meeting Entrepreneurial track presentation, a Convergence Accelerator Conference Roundtable discussion in Tucson, and The Society for Immunotherapy annual meeting.

Project Catalyst welcomes questions regarding oncology drug development plans that are premature for a pre-IND submission, and values input regarding other efforts that would be useful to early-stage oncology drug development programs. 

The OCE Scientific Collaborative supports FDA oncology staff who participate in regulatory science research, including internal research projects and collaborations with external experts. OCE research focuses on applied (rather than basic) research questions to address specific challenges encountered during the IND and NDA/BLA review process. 

Program highlights from 2023 include:

  • Launched the OCE-Funded Active Extramural Research Projects web page.
  • Released two Requests for Applications in the areas of ultra rare cancers and health equity in oncology trials ( RFA-FD-23-006 and RFA-FD-23-008 ).
  • Worked with the OCE Real World Evidence Program to execute multiple Research Collaboration Agreements (under “Selected Currently Active Oncology RWE Collaborations”).
  • Presented an overview of OCE scientific priorities at 2023 FDA BAA Day .
  • Leveraging Real World Data to Investigate the National History of Rare Cancers Treated in the US Community Oncology Setting to Provide Clinical Context to Inform Future Research, Ontada.
  • Development of neuroblastoma tissue diagnostic utility through fusion of deep learning-based image analytics and targeted multiplex proteomics, Stanford University.
  • SMARTCORE Technology: Using AI and Patient Tissue to Identify Potential Cancer Therapies for Ultra-rare Cancers, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.
  • Using the UNC Clinical Data Warehouse to Evaluate the Benefit/Risk Ratio and Optimal Doses of Molecularly Targeted Therapies and Novel Biologics in Real World Patients, Triangle CERSI.
  • Principal stratification methods and software for intercurrent events in clinical trials, Triangle CERSI.

Project Significant (Statistics in Cancer Trials) holds discussions with the Biopharmaceutical Section of the American Statistical Association, the LUNGevity Foundation and other oncology stakeholders to further the design and analysis of cancer clinical trials with the goal to advance cancer therapies. Visit our web page for links to the latest publications.

Seven key topics in 2023 included:

  • January 10, “Non-inferiority Cancer Clinical Trial Design Considerations when Data from a Single Foreign Country is Available.” This discussion examined the potential non-inferiority cancer clinical trial designs (innovative/Bayesian) using available information from clinical trials conducted outside of the regulatory region for marketing authorization.
  • March 9, “Statistical Considerations in the Early Interim Overall Survival Analysis in Indolent Cancers for Evaluation of Risk.” This discussion explored the possibility of pre-specifying criteria for unacceptable risk for early OS analysis in indolent cancer trials. 
  • April 13, “Consideration of Criteria for Evaluation of Surrogate Endpoint.” This discussion focused on whether the criteria used previously by Shi Q et al, or a modified criteria may be needed for evaluation of future surrogate endpoints.
  • May 11, “Cancer Clinical Trial Design and Analysis Considerations in Evaluating Treatment Effect in Marker Negative Population–Part 2.” This event discussed cancer clinical trial design and analysis considerations and understanding and measuring uncertainties in the evaluation of treatment effect in the marker negative subgroup.
  • August 10, “Design Considerations in the Evaluation of Contribution of Effect of Combination of Two New Investigational Drugs in Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials." This forum focused on trial designs and analysis methods in a randomized trial setting that can provide the requisite information to establish safety and efficacy of new drug combinations while exposing the least number of patients to a potentially less effective monotherapy.
  • October 12, “Impact of Cross-over in the Evaluation of Overall Survival in Randomized Cancer Clinical Trials.” This discussion examined the different statistical methods to understand the impact of cross-over in the evaluation of overall survival in randomized cancer clinical trials where some patients in the control arm receive investigational drug after disease progression.                        
  • December 12, “Considerations in requiring blinded independent central review of radiological scans in randomized cancer clinical trials when progression-free survival is the primary endpoint.” This open forum focused on when or if blinded independent central review of all radiographs from all patients in a randomized cancer clinical trial is necessary. 

BACK TO ANNUAL REPORT MAIN PAGE

Culper Research discloses short position in Acadia Pharma

Reporting by Pratik Jain in Bengaluru; Editing by Shilpi Majumdar

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Billy Small III a patient under treatment with Novo Nordisk's weight-loss drug Wegovy

Ford, GM CEOs open to partnerships to compete with China

The chief executives of U.S. automakers Ford and General Motors said on Thursday they would consider partnerships to cut electric vehicle technology costs as Chinese rivals move into the U.S. and European markets.

Lockheed Martin's logo is seen during Japan Aerospace 2016 air show in Tokyo

IMAGES

  1. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

  2. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

  3. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

  4. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

  5. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

  6. Hse Report Template

    hse research report 509

VIDEO

  1. Next-gen Compute Modules for IoT #technology #innovation #shorts

  2. DBS it's a good 😈🔥#viral #youtubeshorts #shortvideo #zeltrax

  3. Richest Countries In Europe by GDP From 1922 To 2025

  4. Best Intraday Stocks for Tomorrow

  5. uMgqumeni-Wathula Nje!

  6. You Can't Outrun The Money Printer! SAVE IN BITCOIN!

COMMENTS

  1. HSE: Information about health and safety at work

    We would like to show you a description here but the site won't allow us.

  2. Ageing and life extension of offshore installations

    Plant Ageing, Management of Equipment Containing Hazardous Fluids or Pressure, HSE Research Report 509 ; A Framework for Monitoring the Management of Ageing Effects on Safety Critical Elements, Energy Institute, 2009; A Review of Safety Culture and Safety Climate Literature for the Development of the Safety Culture Inspection Toolkit, HSE ...

  3. Reports indexed by year

    2023. RR1200: Evidence on the impact of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on work-related musculoskeletal disorders: evidence summary to 29 April 2021. [13] (2023) RR1198: Implementation of the Principal Designer Role within CDM 2015. [14] (2023) RR1196: Radiation calculations for fireball and jet fire models: A literature review. [15]

  4. Plant ageing: Management of equipment containing hazardous ...

    SUMMARY. The purpose of this report is to increase awareness of the factors to consider when managing equipment containing hazardous fluids or pressure, and to help those responsible for equipment to understand and assess the risks of accumulated damage and deterioration. The information is at a general rather than an equipment-specific level ...

  5. PDF The importance of recognising and managing ageing plant

    Health and Safety Executive (HSE) field inspectors ... nised and HSE Research Report RR 509 "Plant ageing: Management of equipment containing hazardous fluids or ... This paper is based on work conducted by ESR Technology on behalf of the Health & Safety Executive and published in Research Report RR823 (Horrocks et al., 2010) and in the ...

  6. Hse Science and Research Publications

    Open Access to HSE Science and Research. All HSE Research Reports are open access. From 1st January 2014, open access applies to the vast majority of peer-reviewed journal papers describing HSE-led and funded research. Copies of published papers and articles that are not open access can be obtained through your public, academic or company library service.

  7. Semi-quantitative approach to prioritize risk in ...

    In this regard, in the HSE Research Report 509, Wintle et al. [7] provided a specific definition of the equipment ageing issue, focusing on process plants, emphasizing that even the operating conditions, substance aggressivity and weather exposure can significantly affect this process. Especially the plants subjected to the provision of the ...

  8. PDF Managing Ageing Plant

    The Health and Safety Executive has conducted research into these aspects for offshore oil and gas ... Previous work for the HSE (Research Report 509 on Ageing Plant) [1] defined ageing and ageing plant as: "Ageing is not about how old your equipment is; it is about its condition, and how that is changing over time. Ageing is the effect ...

  9. The maintenance of ageing plant and equipment

    The characteristics of an "ageing asset" are defined in the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) Research Report (RR) 509 Plant Ageing as when: ... HSE Research Report RR912 Management of Ageing contains a number of principles that can be adopted in other industries when managing ageing plant and equipment. This is known as an ageing ...

  10. HSE Science and Research Publications 2022

    Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Orchards in the United Kingdom, 2020. Health and Safety Executive (2022) Pesticide usage survey report: Potato stores in the United Kingdom 2020. Health and Safety Executive (2022) Fatal injuries arising from accidents at work in Great Britain: Summary for April to December 2021.

  11. Asset Management « Tutis Energy

    A review of ageing assets consists of a full assessment of operating and maintenance practices and procedures, in order to determine gaps when compared to the HSE Research Report 509 (RR509) "Plant Ageing, Management of Equipment containing Hazardous fluids or Pressure". Reliability Studies

  12. - HSE

    HSE Research and Development Publications. Consent for research in health and social care. HSE Research Governance Framework. Research & Development is a new HSE function that has been set up to develop a framework for governance, support & strategic direction for health research.

  13. UK HSE

    This represents 28% of all reported 'major accident' loss of containment events in the MARS database and equates to an overall loss of 11 lives, 183 injuries and over € 170 million of economic loss. Onshore chemical plant in the UK is ageing. Between 1996 and 2008 there have been 173 loss of containment incidents reported in RIDDOR that can ...

  14. PDF NCHRP Report 509

    JEFFREY W. RUNGE, National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) ALLAN RUTTER, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT (ex officio) ... NCHRP REPORT 509 Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

  15. Introduction to Challenges for Health and Safety in Research

    Research laboratories provide a unique environment of continually evolving work, varying levels of individual competence and increasingly shared workspaces between different projects and research groups. Health and safety management in research laboratories faces unique challenges to ensure that science and knowledge is advanced without being a ...

  16. HSE Research and Development Publications

    The Use of Research Evidence in the Health Service Executive (HSE) in Ireland - A Study with Senior Decision-Makers (2022)The aim of this study was to examine the experiences and perceptions of evidence use among senior decision-makers in the HSE in Ireland, including perceived barriers and facilitators to using research evidence. For further information about

  17. HSE's Annual Report highlights evaluation strategy to assess regulator

    The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is developing an 'iterative evaluation strategy' so it can assess the impact its interventions are having on improving rates of ill health in the workplace. ... One is a collaborative research programme on stress that is based around the model of the National Core Study on Covid. This draws on the input ...

  18. PDF CONTRACT RESEARCH REPORT 430/2002

    safety 49 a.4.1 leadership research 50 a.4.2 safety leadership behaviours 53 a.4.3 summary 57 a.5 interviews with behavioural observation and feedback providers 57 a.5.1 method 58 a.5.2 main features of a behavioural safety programme 58 a.5.3 assessing readiness to implement a behavioural safety programme 60

  19. Plant Ageing Study, Phase 1 Report, Research Report RR823, Health and

    Plant Ageing Study, Phase 1 Report, Research Report RR823, Health and Safety Executive (HSE), United Kingdom, 2010. Between 1996 and 2008 it is estimated that there have been 173 loss of containment incidents reported in RIDDOR that can be attributable to ageing plant. This represents 5.5% of all loss of containment events.

  20. PDF RESEARCH REPORT 151

    assessments. The report sets out examples of good practice in relation to risk assessment, and contrasts these with pitfalls encountered by HSE, illustrated by case study examples. The project was jointly funded by HSE's Field Operations and Hazardous Installations Directorates. Objectives The objectives of this stage of the project were to:

  21. hse research report 509

    In 2006, HSE published a Plant Ageing report (RR509)1 written by industry experts, the.... of an "ageing asset" are defined in the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) Research Report (RR) 509 Plant Ageing as when:.... Waltham Public Schools (FC509); Webster Public Schools (FC510). Funding Type: Federal CFDA 84.371.

  22. Ethical Approval for Research in the HSE & its funded organisations

    Research Ethics Committees (RECs) are a fundamental part of the process of the governance of health research. The role of RECs is to protect the safety, welfare, and rights of participants in health research. RECs are responsible for ensuring research adheres to high quality ethical standards and that appropriate informed and explicit consent for health and

  23. Researching Law Schools: Harnessing the Power of ABA 509 Reports

    The ABA Standard 509 reports are submitted by accredited law schools to the ABA (American Bar Association) each year. They contain detailed information about each law school's admitted class, such as the acceptance rate, 75/50/25 percentiles of admitted students' LSAT/GPA/GRE* (*if the law school accepts GRE scores), and much more.

  24. NEU ASX: Neuren Pharmaceuticals sinks 13pc on Culper Research short

    Neuren Pharmaceuticals has rebuked a short seller report targeting its US-listed drug licensing partner Acadia, which sent the shares in the Melbourne-based biotech tumbling 14.2 per cent by ...

  25. 24RS HB 509

    LRC Research Reports; LRC Informational Bulletins; LRC Research Memoranda; ... House Bill 509. Actions . Last Action: 02/12/24: to Committee on Committees (H) Title: ... Public Records and Reports - Public records, definition Public Records and Reports - Public records, exclusions

  26. Americans' concerns, feelings about U.S.-Mexico ...

    When asked in an open-ended question about their top concerns regarding the large number of migrants seeking to enter the U.S. at the border with Mexico, the most commonly cited concerns relate either to the economic costs and burdens associated with the migration surge or concerns about security (22% of concerns fall into each of these categories).

  27. The abortion pill case on its way to the Supreme Court cites a

    A research paper that raises questions about the safety of abortion has been retracted. The research is cited in a federal judge's ruling about the abortion pill mifepristone.

  28. Oncology Research and Development 2023

    This forum focused on trial designs and analysis methods in a randomized trial setting that can provide the requisite information to establish safety and efficacy of new drug combinations while ...

  29. Culper Research discloses short position in Acadia Pharma

    Feb 15 (Reuters) - Culper Research has taken a short position on Acadia Pharmaceuticals' (ACAD.O), opens new tab stock, it said on Thursday, sending the drugmaker's shares down as much as 8% ...