Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Fire Fighters and EMS ... - NAEMT

<strong>Effects</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Sleep</strong> <strong>Deprivation</strong> on Fire Fighters and EMS Responders
Once those fatigue issues were clearly documented, in 1999 the name <strong>of</strong> the Ames group was
changed to the Fatigue Countermeasures Group to provide a greater emphasis on the development
and evaluation <strong>of</strong> countermeasures and education concerning fatigue. They developed and
conducted 90 minute presentations on fatigue and hosted an interactive website. Although they
are no longer funded, they maintain the website, which is available at http://humanfactors.arc.nasa.gov/zteam/webETM/GA_ETM/GA_ETM_premod.html.
The module is entitled,
“Alertness Management in Flight Operations,” and it includes basic information about fatigue,
sleep, sleepiness and circadian rhythms. It describes how flight operations affect physiological
factors, identifies some <strong>of</strong> the misconceptions about fatigue in aviation and <strong>of</strong>fers countermeasure
recommendations.
The aviation industry is an example <strong>of</strong> the complexities in balancing competing interests <strong>of</strong>
employees (who are paid on contracts and not with an hourly rate), safety experts, economic
interests and federal regulatory agencies. Currently, conflicts exist between 1) existing regulations
concerning duty hours and 2) scientific evidence and recommendations from the airline pilot
organizations and the National Transportation Safety Board (Holley at al., 2003).
The Federal Aviation Administration, part <strong>of</strong> the Department <strong>of</strong> Transportation, establishes the
Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) governing flight and duty time, and those rules and regulations
have remained largely unchanged since instituted in the 1930s. However, it is the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), an agency authorized by Congress, that investigates U.S.
aviation accidents or those involving U.S.-built aircraft. The NTSB views generally align with those
<strong>of</strong> the pilot unions, which maintain that the current scheduling system results in unsafe levels <strong>of</strong>
alertness.
While the absolute number <strong>of</strong> commercial airline crashes is low, the percent fatigue-related is
greater than that <strong>of</strong> commercial motor vehicles, where fatigue’s effects have been well publicized.
Both major U.S. pilots unions have posted extensive material on this issue on their websites (Air
line Pilots Association [www.alpa.org/] and Allied Pilots Association [www.alliedpilots.org]).
In 2006, the NTSB Acting Chair Mark Rosenker characterized the FAA’s past efforts as ‘dismal’ in
failing to set appropriate duty time limits.
Because the FARs rules are perceived as inadequate, over the years they have been buttressed by
collective bargaining agreements. However, those agreements affect only a part <strong>of</strong> the U.S. airline
industry and do not result in uniform flight and duty time limits. Lack <strong>of</strong> mandated requirements,
and economic demands have pressured carriers to reduce flight crew rest breaks to increase
productivity and reduce costs. Those same airline economic forces and lobbying efforts also may
have hampered Federal FARs reform.
The FAR regulations vary for different types <strong>of</strong>
aircraft (domestic, commuter, on-demand) and
with the number <strong>of</strong> pilots on the flight deck. The
maximum duty hours for four member domestic
asrs.arc.nasa.gov/database.htm
flights is up to 18 hours, and a seven consecutive
day flight hour maximum <strong>of</strong> 30 hours (100 hours in one month). The core principles sought by
pilot groups and the NTSB include 1) minimum <strong>of</strong> 10 hours <strong>of</strong>f duty in every 24 hour period to
allow for adequate sleep, 2) maximum scheduled duty period <strong>of</strong> 14 hours and 3) flight limit <strong>of</strong> 8
hours between rest periods.
36