Safety against fire in basic health units
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.76124Keywords:
fire extinguishing systems, familiarity with fire extinguishing, basic health units, health professionalsAbstract
Nowadays it is widely recognized the demand of a modernization of the Government and his administrative entities. According to the legislation referent to fire prevention the Firefighters were the most proactive entity concerning the creation of legislation based on the tragic incidents and the experience acquired in daily routines. A fire can occur in any situation whether exist or not human activities and Basic Health Units are not free from this event and unfortunately a real possibility of this happening due to elevated fire charge. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the level of knowledge and that employees have in relation to Fire Safety theme and confront the findings with the needs required by law due to the non-mandatory fire brigade constitution in Basic Health Units with ground floor and inferior to 750 m² whose requisites fulfill the vast majority of buildings. The research method is qualitative observational and descriptive by convenience sample in nine Basic Health Units in city council Santo André,(São Paulo, Brazil) with the aim to enrich the health professionals knowledge about fire prevention was also evaluated in this case study.References
DL 426/89 - Medidas Cautelares de Segurança contra Risco de Incêndio em Centros Urbanos Antigos Ministério da Administração Interna e das Obras Públicas, Transportes e Comunicações. Diário da República, 1.ª série, Decreto Lei n.º426 de 6 de Dezembro de 1989. Lisboa. pp:5309-5313.
Grupo de Fomento à Segurança contra Incêndios (GSI), A Tragédia em Santa Maria e as questões sobre segurança contra incêndios no Brasil; São Paulo, 2013.
Portal Brasil, Disponível em http://www.brasil.gov.br/saude/2011/09/usuariosdo-sus-serao-atendidos-em-unidadesproximas-a-seus-domicilios. Fontes: Ministérioda Saúde, Relatórios de UBS, Departamento de Atenção Básica, Sistema único de Saúde, Setembro 2013.
Claret AM, Mattedi DL. Estudo da prescritividade das normas técnicas brasileiras de segurança contra incêndio. R. Esc. Minas 2011; 64(3): 265-271.
SEITO, Alexandre Itiu. et al. A segurança contra incêndio no Brasil. São Paulo: Projeto Editora, 2008.
Decreto Estadual nº 56.819/11. Regulamento de segurança contra incêndio das edificações e áreas de risco. Polícia Militar do Estado de São Paulo. Corpo de Bombeiros. Decreto Estadual nº 56.819/11. São Paulo. 2011.
Reis RJ, La Roccaa PF, Silveira AM, Bonilla IML, Ginéc AN, Martín M. Fatores relacionados ao absenteísmo por doença em profissionais de enfermagem. Rev Saúde Pública 2003;37(5):616-23.
Beyler CL. Fire Safety Challenges in the 21st century. Journal of Fire Protection Engineering 2001; 11(1):4-15.
Fernandes R. Regulação na Proteção e Socorro: Segurança contra Incêndios em Edifícios. Dissertação de Mestrado, Lisboa, 2009.
King, M. Health is a sustainable state. Lancet, 1990, 336: 664-667.
McMichael, AJ. Population health as the ‘bottom line’ of sustainability: a contemporary challenge for public health researchers. European Journal of Public Health, 16: 579-582.
Atrash HK, Carpentier R. The evolving role of public health in the delivery of health care. Journal of Human Growth and Development. 2012; 22(3): 396-399.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL PUBLISHERS
Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:
- Follow this code, and encourage the editors they work with to follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Edi- tors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf)
- Ensure the editors and journals they work with are aware of what their membership of COPE provides and en- tails
- Provide reasonable practical support to editors so that they can follow the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/New_Code.pdf_)
Publishers should:
- Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
- Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
- Protect intellectual property and copyright
- Foster editorial independence
Publishers should work with journal editors to:
- Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:
– Editorial independence
– Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research
– Authorship
– Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards
– Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor
– Appeals and complaints
- Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
- Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
- Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
- Maintain the integrity of the academic record
- Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
- Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
- Publish content on a timely basis