An evaluation of the role of fire extinguishers

Evidence base
This report is not the result of a systematic review, but one in which, within the confines of the remit,
evidence was sought to illustrate specific issues. The results help to build an ‘as is’ description of the role
of portable fire extinguishers as seen from a user perspective.
As far as possible, the evidence was sourced from academic studies, recognised sector publications and
published data sources (see Bibliography). Each of these has its strengths and weaknesses along with
various factors that influence its content and reliability. Individual assessments are not given for each
evidence source, but, in combination, they were sufficient to develop a broad understanding in most
areas and detailed insight in others.
Throughout the report, reference is made to information that appears to be unavailable. It is accepted
that some of these sources may exist, but were either not discovered by the author, or may be held
within private domains, e.g. companies. Unless otherwise stated, their omission does not undermine the
findings.
In general, this report refers to both dwelling (single) and HMO premises without distinction. This is
because the evidence either, does not reveal notable differences, or is too scarce to form a view.
However, the application of the findings of this report are not always of equal significance to each
property type. Each section identifies any important features applicable primarily, or solely, to an HMO.
In recognition of the limited and fragmented evidence, it is a recommendation of this report that more be
done to build a comprehensive and integrated understanding of the public experience of using a portable
fire extinguisher. Without this, it appears impossible to have confidence that those charged with making
decisions about portable fire extinguishers are doing so based on a full and current knowledge. Where
public safety is at stake, this should be a minimum requirement.
Where opinion is offered, it is that of the author’s alone unless otherwise stated. Readers are welcome to
disagree and, in doing so, may find it helpful to consider why. Is it due to their experience, knowledge or
assumptions? A curiosity-driven mindset will enhance the value of the report far beyond its stated
content and will hopefully lead to discussions that continuously drive improvement.
2