METHOD: In this study, participating industrial practitioners rated the compliance status of each indicator using a numbering system adapted from the traffic light system, based on the actual performance of 10 oil platforms in Malaysia. Safety scores of the platforms were calculated based on the ratings and compared with the actual lagging performance of the platforms. Safety scores of two platforms were compared with the facility status reports' findings of the respective platforms.
RESULTS: The platforms studied generally had good performance. Total recordable incident rates of the platforms were found to show significant negative correlations with management and work engagement on safety, compliance score for number of incident and near misses, personal safety, and management of change. Lost time injury rates, however, correlated negatively with hazard identification and risk assessment. The safety scores generally agreed with findings of the facility status reports with substandard process containment found as a contributor of hydrocarbon leaks.
CONCLUSIONS: This study proves the criterion validity of the safety performance evaluation framework and demonstrates its usability for benchmarking and continuous improvement of safety practices on the Malaysian offshore oil and gas platforms.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: This study reveals the applicability of the framework and the potential of extending safety reporting beyond the few conventional lagging safety performance indicators used. The study also highlights the synergy between correlating safety factors to streamline safety management on offshore platforms.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Protocols statement was used as a template for this protocol. A systematic search of Medline, Embase and Global Health from database inception to present will be conducted to identify prospective studies reporting on the associations between major measures of body composition (body mass index, waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, total body fat, visceral adiposity tissue and lean mass) and risk of heart failure. Article screening and selection will be performed by two reviewers independently, and disagreements will be adjudicated by consensus or by a third reviewer. Data from eligible articles will be extracted, and article quality will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Relative risks (and 95% CIs) will be pooled in a fixed effect meta-analysis, if there is no prohibitive heterogeneity of studies as assessed using the Cochrane Q statistic and I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses will be by age, sex, ethnicity and heart failure subtypes. Publication bias in the meta-analysis will be assessed using Egger's test and funnel plots.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This work is secondary analyses on published data and ethical approval is not required. We plan to publish results in an open-access peer-reviewed journal, present it at international and national conferences, and share the findings on social media.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020224584.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of hand position and lower limb length measurement method on LQ-YBT scores and their interpretation.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: National Sports Institute of Malaysia.
PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 46 volunteers, consisting of 23 men (age = 25.7 ± 4.6 years, height = 1.70 ± 0.05 m, mass = 69.3 ± 9.2 kg) and 23 women (age = 23.5 ± 2.5 years, height = 1.59 ± 0.07 m, mass = 55.7 ± 10.6 kg).
INTERVENTION(S): Participants performed the LQ-YBT with hands on hips and hands free to move on both lower limbs.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): In a single-legged stance, participants reached with the contralateral limb in each of the anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions 3 times. Maximal reach distances in each direction were normalized to lower limb length measured from the anterior-superior iliac spine to the lateral and medial malleoli. Composite scores (average of the 3 normalized reach distances) and anterior-reach differences (in raw units) were extracted and used to identify participants at risk for injury (ie, anterior-reach difference ≥4 cm or composite score ≤94%). Data were analyzed using paired t tests, Fisher exact tests, and magnitude-based inferences (effect size [ES], ±90% confidence limits [CLs]).
RESULTS: Differences between hand positions in normalized anterior-reach distances were trivial (t91 = -2.075, P = .041; ES = 0.12, 90% CL = ±0.10). In contrast, reach distances were greater when the hands moved freely for the normalized posteromedial (t91 = -6.404, P < .001; ES = 0.42, 90% CL = ±0.11), posterolateral (t91 = -6.052, P < .001; ES = 0.58, 90% CL = ±0.16), and composite (t91 = -7.296, P < .001; ES = 0.47, 90% CL = ±0.11) scores. A similar proportion of the cohort was classified as at risk with the hands on the hips (35% [n = 16]) and the hands free to move (43% [n = 20]; P = .52). However, the participants classified as at risk with the hands on the hips were not all categorized as at risk with the hands free to move and vice versa. The lower limb length measurement method exerted trivial effects on LQ-YBT outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Hand position exerted nontrivial effects on LQ-YBT outcomes and interpretation, whereas the lower limb length measurement method had trivial effects.