Reducing risk at aquatic facilities through lifeguard training.

In order for a defendant to be found negligent in a court case where one party is suing another because they have suffered some type of loss, the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to establish that: 1) they were owed a duty by the defendant; 2) the defendant failed to take reasonable precautions, or breeched the required standard of care; 3) that this breech was the direct cause of their loss; and 4) that they have actually suffered some type of loss.

Sections of risk management texts on defenses to negligence usually focus on legal defenses such as assumption of risk, contributory negligence, and governmental immunity. While these are all important concepts for parties who find themselves in a courtroom, a more proactive defense against negligence is to reduce the chance of ending up in court by insuring that you have acted reasonably and not breeched any standard of care in providing a safe environment for your patrons.

Many accidents at aquatic facilities are un-preventable, and no matter how hard we try, patrons will still suffer injuries at our facilities. Since we cannot eliminate all injuries at our facilities, the key to reducing our exposure to risk is to minimize the number of preventable injuries and diminish the severity of the accidents that do occur. Since lifeguards are usually the individuals responsible for maintaining safety at aquatic facilities, they are an important component in insuring that our facilities are safe and that we have acted reasonably to protect the welfare of our patrons. Furthermore, even if lifeguards are personally responsible for an accident or injury through willful, wanton, or reckless misconduct, few of them have the "deep pockets" required to make a lawsuit worthwhile. Therefore a common strategy of plaintiff's lawyers is to go after the agency that hired the lifeguard on the basis that they did not meet the reasonable expectation of properly training their personnel.

Training in Question

It is easy to assume that all lifeguards who have been trained and certified by a reputable organization such as the American Red Cross, United States Lifeguarding Association, or Ellis and Associates are ready to work in their facility. However, the consideration of recent research findings on lifeguard behavior and perceptions indicate otherwise. The data summarized below is a portion of the findings from the National and International Lifeguard Rescue and Resuscitation Surveys completed between 1994 and 1998.

* In 1998, 63% of lifeguards rated their on the job or in-service training as more valuable than what they received from their certifying agency.

* While 93% of the 1998 lifeguards in the sample rated their training as either "sufficient" or "more than sufficient," 7% responded that their rescue training was either "very insufficient", "not very sufficient" or they just "weren't sure". It is very likely that a portion of these lifeguards will someday face rescue situations.

* Although the majority (73%) of 1998 guards rated their non-equipment rescue training as sufficient or above, over one quarter of the sample reported that their rescue training without equipment was inadequate. This is especially relevant when considering that 98% of the lifeguards in the sample expressed confidence that they could make a rescue using equipment, compared to only 88% who indicated confidence without equipment.

* 33% of the guards participating in the 1995 study reported that it took them over 10 seconds to make a complete visual scan of their specific swimming zones.

* A quarter (26%) of the 1995 sample reported that they were not aware of any specific scanning techniques, and two-thirds (66%) of this group said that they felt additional scanning training would be beneficial.

* Only 25% of lifeguards in 1995 reported that they were very well trained.

* Despite the fact that 21% of lifeguards characterize their roles as either babysitters or rule enforcers, 50% of the guards in the 1998 sample reported making a real rescue (not a tired swimmers assist) in the last 12 months.

* Only 72% of the 1996 lifeguards reported that they were very confident of their abilities to make a successful water rescue, and approximately 7% of these lifeguards indicated that they were either "unsure", "fairly unconfident", or "very unconfident" of their abilities to rescue a patron in the water.

Considered independently, each of the above items is disturbing in that they each demonstrate that a few improperly trained lifeguards have slipped through the cracks of their respective certification agencies and are working in an environment where they are responsible for the safety of our patrons. Moreover, the aggregate significance of these findings is alarming in that a relatively large number of lifeguards have serious doubts about their training and abilities to complete a successful rescue in a variety of settings and situations. These research findings should highlight the need for aquatic facilities to implement comprehensive in-service training and testing programs to insure that their lifeguards are capable of preventing catastrophic accidents and minimizing exposure to loss.

The exact items that should be covered during in-service training will partly depend on the specific nature of the facility where the guards will be employed and on the local and state standards that you are attempting not to breech. However, the four themes of recognizing potential problems, technical swimming and rescue skills, treating accident victims, and policies and procedures have emerged from the research and should be included in all training programs.

Fundamental Tasks

Recognizing problems, particularly a swimmer in danger, is one of the most fundamental tasks that lifeguards must accomplish. However, drowning often occurs in supervised aquatic facilities because many lifeguards have been inadequately trained to observe and recognize problems. Observations have been made which indicate that on several occasions persons exhibiting the instinctive drowning response in areas where lifeguards were on duty have drowned because the lifeguards did not recognize or observe the distress of the victim. Therefore, training in this area should include modules on recognizing swimmers in distress and on proper scanning techniques. Lifeguards should be trained to look for and recognize signs that a swimmer is in distress such as reaching and grabbing, a vertical position in deep water, or no leg movement. Ideally, trainers should provide examples of these types of distress symbols in a pool, rather than rely on photographs, drawings, or text. The fact that relatively large portions of sampled lifeguards were unaware of any scanning techniques, spent too much time to complete a total scan of their zones of responsibility, and believed that they could benefit from additional scanning training, states the need for additional instruction in this area.

Scanning the Zones

Lifeguards should be trained on-site to know the exact zones they are responsible for, as well as specific techniques to allow them to complete a scan of these zones within an appropriate time frame. While Ellis and Associates recommends ten seconds and some agencies call for a five second scan, large zones containing high numbers of bathers may require longer scan times. Considering that more than half of the 1996 lifeguard sample watched their swimmers less than 100% of the time, swimmers in guarded areas are often put at risk by inattentive lifeguards. Therefore, an additional training topic in this module should include educating lifeguards on ways to prevent distractions and boredom. One such technique is the 5-Minute Scanning Strategy", a systematic observational technique that improves attention and concentration while reducing boredom. This simple yet effective technique requires on-duty lifeguards to change their posture (sit, stand, walk, etc.) and incorporate a visual scanning pattern every five minutes. Not only does this technique insure that the guards will be more vigilant, but supervision and patron impressions also improve due to the observable changes that occur on a regular basis.

Technical swimming and rescue skills must also be offered and tested as part of an in-service training regimen. Just because a lifeguard has a card that says they are certified does not make them a strong swimmer or rescuer. Lifeguards must be trained and practice passive, active, and submerged victim rescues both with and without rescue equipment. Similar to the previous modules, these skills should be taught at the site where the lifeguards will be working in order to familiarize them with their facility and equipment, and give them confidence that they are able to make a successful rescue at their pool. The importance of these skills can also be emphasized through periodical testing events such as monthly skill checks or competitions where incentives are offered to guards who show significant improvement or exceed standards.

Only Half the Battle

Often times the act of getting a person out of the water is only half the battle that lifeguards face. In addition to swimming and rescue techniques, guards must also be trained in spinal injury and resuscitation methods. Once again, it is essential that guards be trained on-site so that they are familiar and comfortable with the exact pieces of equipment they will use during a real life rescue. This is especially important considering the new developments in rescue and resuscitation aids, as well as the number of manufacturers producing these devices. It is unlikely that certification agencies are training lifeguards on the proper use of standard rescue breathing, the Heimlich maneuver, mechanical resuscitators, and automatic defibrillators, not to mention the exact make and model of these devices that are available at your pool. Even subtle differences in the way that two different manufacture's backboard straps contain a spinal injury victim can cause confusion in high stress situations and waste precious seconds when rescuing an individual. With this in mind, all lifeguards must be trained and display a high degree of efficiency in the use of the exact equipment that they will use in responding to a crisis situation. A final suggestion on the selection and training of equipment use is to involve the local emergency response or paramedic personnel. Including these individuals in the training process not only adds additional credibility to the training program, but also helps insure that rescue equipment is synchronized and compatible with local provisions.

Policies and procedures, particularly for emergency situations are also of vital importance to in-service training. Too often, lawsuits arise where plaintiffs are successful in court, despite their own distress through reckless behavior, because the defendant did not have an adequate emergency response plan. Therefore, not only should emergency policies and procedures be devised to allow for every foreseeable contingency, but also all lifeguards should be trained on their duties for each of these potential events. Examples of items that should be incorporated in this module include when to call an ambulance and under what circumstances to clear a pool of swimmers. The goal for emergency responses should be that each employee independently acts in a proper manner in order to resolve the situation in as safe and efficient manner as possible. The only way to achieve this goal is through training and practice. The majority of accidents that occur at facilities however, do not constitute emergencies.

Be Aware of Procedures

Therefore, lifeguards should also be familiar with procedures on applying first aid for minor accidents and the proper documentation of accidents by completing accident report forms. Finally, employee and patron policies must also be included to insure that all lifeguards are aware of procedures regarding rotation of guards on duty, maintenance tasks, safety rules, missing work policies, and any other pollicies or procedures that effect the day to day operation and safety of the facility where they work.

While training lifeguards is an important step in reducing exposure to risk, lifeguards should also be periodically tested or asked to demonstrate their skills and knowledge as a measure of their training and readiness. It is also important to document the results of the tests and have lifeguards sign an acknowledgement stating exactly what training they received, and that they understand and are proficient in all aspects that it covers. Many potential lawsuits asserting that an agency was negligent in training its employees can be avoided by producing well kept and up to date records which document an all inclusive training program.

Not every accident at any recreational facility can be avoided. Furthermore, research indicates that the majority of lifeguards are relatively young, inexperienced, and require supervision. However, by taking the reasonable step of incorporating an in-service training program for new and existing employees into an overall supervision plan, many preventable accidents can be eliminated, and the severity of injuries that do occur can be minimized. This will result in competent and more confident employees, a better community reputation, a decrease in exposure to loss resulting from lawsuits, and most importantly, an enjoyable and more efficient facility that is as safe as possible for patrons, visitors, and guests.

RELATED ARTICLE: Re-Inventing the LifeGuard Chair

by Tom Griffiths Ed.D.

We've only done it wrong for about 100 years now, taking young, energetic teenage lifeguards and placing them in tall, skinny lifeguard towers and asking them to sit there stoically and professionally without moving for long periods of time. And we've been battling the product of this high-chair mentality for decades--bored, tired, and listless lifeguards who hate getting in and out of the chair. Consider the Seinfeld episode where George finally convinces a standing security guard to have a seat and shortly thereafter the security guard falls asleep and the clothing store gets robbed right under his drooping eyelids. Why are we the only surveillance profession to encourage our people to sit?

Taller lifeguard stations are needed primarily when glare and over-crowded conditions in our aquatic facilities require a high, bird's eye surveillance position without visual obstructions or distractions. However, there is room for a shorter, wider lifeguard station that encourages the "Sit, Stand. Stroll" philosophy of guarding.

There is plenty of research available to indicate that standing and walking is preferable to sitting, keeping lifeguards more alert, attentive and happy while on duty.

When lifeguards do sit, they should not remain seated for more than five minutes or a performance decrement may begin. Shorter, wider lifeguard stations that provide standing positions on either side of the platform allow lifeguards to significantly change their posture while in the same station every five minutes. This new method of guarding is proven to be safer and more efficient, because guests and supervisors see a significant posture change every five minutes and they see the guard being more vigilant. Replacing the ladders on the back of lifeguard stands with wide steps up the front not only makes the station easier to get in and out of, but also extends the station closer to the water and allows lifeguards to communicate more easily with guests.

In far too many aquatic situations, the tall lifeguard chair hinders, rather than helps, lifeguard effectiveness, it is often difficult, if not dangerous, to enter and exit a six foot lifeguard chair. While it is true that the tall lifeguard chair puts the guard on a pedestal that improves the visual vantage point, it often results in a bored lifeguard who resists getting out of their perch. Additionally, remaining stationary while in a chair promotes drowsiness.

Shorter, wider lifeguard stations are becoming more popular for a variety of reasons including:

* Reducing likelihood of the shoulder strap harness on the rescue tube "hanging" the lifeguard from a height.

* Increasing patrolling and communicating with guests and patrons.

* Responding more quickly and safely to emergency situations.

* Encouraging standing to add height to the surveillance angle.

* Remaining more attentive and alert without diverting attention from the water.

If a facility needs a taller lifeguard stand, consider the "tower zero" concept from our ocean lifeguards. In this case, one tall lifeguard chair or tower is used to oversee the entire facility with its guests and lifeguards. A variety of lower, more efficient lifeguard stations closer to the water's edge are then used for better response times and improved communications with guests. In most, but not all aquatic facilities, the shorter lifeguard stations will provide increased safety and enjoyment to both the guests and the lifeguards. Please remember a stoic and stationary lifeguard is often a bored and inattentive lifeguard.

Tom Griffiths, Ed.D. is the Director of Aquatics and Safety Officer for Athletics at Penn State University. He has been involved in all phases of aquatics for more than 25 years. He also oversees the Sarni Tennis Tournament Facility at University Park. Dr. Griffiths is the author of The Complete Swimming Pool Reference published by Harcourt Brace & Company, The Swimming Pool by Simon and Schuster and Sport SCUBA Diving, in Depth published by the Princeton Book Company. His latest book, Better Beaches, released by the National Recreation and Park Association, is a huge success and has led to the development of NRPA's Better Beach Seminars, which Dr. Griffiths teaches throughout the country. He also teaches the Aquatic Facility Operators Course (AFO) for NRPA.

Don Steel, Ph.D. is responsible for sports psychology and test measurements at the University of Maryland and Hans Vogelsong, Ph.D., is assistant professor and director of the management of recreation facilities and services degree in the Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies at East Carolina University. His teaching and research interests include visitor behavior, attitudes and preferences, aquatics, risk management, and maintenance, safety, and operations. Dr. Vogelsong and his colleagues are currently developing a new aquatics management certificate program option at ECU. He, along with his co-authors, has conducted several national and international surveys of lifeguard behavior and abilities. Their article on diminishing risk through lifeguard training is the latest of several publications based on the results of this research.