马来西亚公立医院建筑火灾风险评估

IF 2.2 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Facilities Management Pub Date : 2023-05-31 DOI:10.1108/jfm-11-2021-0138
Naziah Salleh, Agus Salim Nuzaihan Aras, Norsafiah Norazman, Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman
{"title":"马来西亚公立医院建筑火灾风险评估","authors":"Naziah Salleh, Agus Salim Nuzaihan Aras, Norsafiah Norazman, Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman","doi":"10.1108/jfm-11-2021-0138","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This paper aims to evaluate the level of compliance of fire safety with the legal requirements in Malaysia government hospital buildings by evaluating via fire risk management. Design/methodology/approach Five government hospitals were selected. These five hospitals were selected due to the location of Penang, which is one of the fast-growing states in Malaysia (Salleh, 2019; Ebekozien, 2019). This state is the second most densely populated state after Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, with an average distribution of 1,490 persons per square km. This higher population caused the higher demand on the health-care services by the public (DOSM, 2016). The observation and building audit processes are as described. Hundreds of photos were taken for qualitative analysis, and all fire safety elements were measured for the descriptive analysis for each hospital. The framework of audit elements is created based on the Life Safety Code: NFPA 101 (2018), UBBL 1984: Part VII (Fire Requirements) and Part VIIII (Fire Alarms, Fire Detection, Fire Extinguishment and Fire Fighting Access). The cross-sectional descriptive evaluation is conducted in the case studies building in accordance with Life Safety Code of NFPA, also known as NFPA 101. To conduct the study, the information needed to assess the fire safety status was extracted from the CFSES software based on the NFPA 101 standard and prepared and compiled by the researcher as a checklist. In the next stage, gathered information was analysed using Computerised Fire Safety Evaluation System (CFSES) software. This method was developed based on the NFPA 101 standard and evaluated the fire risk from four dimensions of containment, extinguishment, people movement and general safety. This software gives the risk assessment results in three areas of fire control, exits and general safety. To assess the fire risk of the commercial buildings after entering the background information (height, age, number of stories, etc.) in the software, the software first calculates the score that the building should obtain in the three aspects of fire control, exit routes and general safety (minimum score required). Findings The utmost zones in the case studies (44.3%) occupied by limited mobility are located at low-rise buildings or at the first floor to third floor of the hospital buildings. Hospitals managements lacked in creating the maximum exit route and egress the occupants to disclosed the building during evacuation, it correlates to the patients' mobility positions strategy to assign their categories that fell on effortless mobilisation. Surveyed hospitals were built with the non-combustible materials, even though four of the case studies were built before 1984. Hospitals were equipped with hazard separations and vertical smoke pores, and in most of the zones, sprinkler system is installed only in the corridors, equipped with communication system and system of communication with fire and relief organisations and has a fire detection and alarm system throughout the building. Results of fire risk assessment on four groups of elements were tested via CFSES revealed from 122 zones of surveyed hospitals; 102 or 84% of zones give the highest failed rate to comply the NFPA 101 requirements in terms of people movement in the building. The high-occupied Penang General Hospital contributed as the highest case study for not complying with the minimum requirements in all dimensions: people movement elements (41 zones), fire containment (31 zones), fire extinguisher (31 zones) and general safety (20). Fire extinguishment (62 zones) recorded the highest numbers of zones that complied with NFPA 101 (2013). The overall results of the fire risk assessment suggested that in terms of the fire control, egress and general safety aspects, the fire risk assessment score was unacceptable (failed) in all hospital buildings studied, and in the three areas mentioned, the general safety, egress/exit routes and fire control were in a worse status in terms of the score obtained in the software. None of the surveyed hospital received the minimum safety score in the three areas mentioned. The involvement of Emergency Response Team is crucial to overcome this egress or fire exit requirement and parameters. Research limitations/implications Several limitations exist in this research that cannot be controlled. Firstly, the occupancy rates only determined during peak hour. Accessibility into hospital compound permitted only during daytime. Secondly, the fire safety audits and fire safety risk management in this research are not being conducted by a professional architect or engineer and as a result must be relied on the direct inspection checklist to create valid results. Thirdly, this research has some limitations which need to be noted but does not affect the robustness of the study’s findings. This study focuses only on five selected public hospitals in one state of the northern region of Malaysia and excluded data gathering from all other parts of Malaysia. The perception of hospital operators regarding fire safety issues from different state hospitals may allow comparisons. Practical implications The findings of this paper should make a key practical contribution to the body of knowledge. In practice, the proposed framework should expand the knowledge of public hospital fire safety management plan concerning the level of fire safety compliance with the requirements in government hospital buildings and develop a fire safety management plan framework for government hospital buildings. Social implications This paper develops an early framework component related to the occupants’ safety which gives the basis for future research in hospital fire safety settings as it imparts early investigation into the consequence of investigating the phenomenon from the operators’ perspective as an attempt to improve public health-care fire safety performance in hospitals. Originality/value This paper has created a few measurement tools that can be applied among public hospital buildings stakeholders to perform the fire safety audit and risk management and rate the performance of Fire Safety Management in public hospitals.","PeriodicalId":46544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Facilities Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fire risk assessment of Malaysia public hospital buildings\",\"authors\":\"Naziah Salleh, Agus Salim Nuzaihan Aras, Norsafiah Norazman, Syahrul Nizam Kamaruzzaman\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jfm-11-2021-0138\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose This paper aims to evaluate the level of compliance of fire safety with the legal requirements in Malaysia government hospital buildings by evaluating via fire risk management. Design/methodology/approach Five government hospitals were selected. These five hospitals were selected due to the location of Penang, which is one of the fast-growing states in Malaysia (Salleh, 2019; Ebekozien, 2019). This state is the second most densely populated state after Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, with an average distribution of 1,490 persons per square km. This higher population caused the higher demand on the health-care services by the public (DOSM, 2016). The observation and building audit processes are as described. Hundreds of photos were taken for qualitative analysis, and all fire safety elements were measured for the descriptive analysis for each hospital. The framework of audit elements is created based on the Life Safety Code: NFPA 101 (2018), UBBL 1984: Part VII (Fire Requirements) and Part VIIII (Fire Alarms, Fire Detection, Fire Extinguishment and Fire Fighting Access). The cross-sectional descriptive evaluation is conducted in the case studies building in accordance with Life Safety Code of NFPA, also known as NFPA 101. To conduct the study, the information needed to assess the fire safety status was extracted from the CFSES software based on the NFPA 101 standard and prepared and compiled by the researcher as a checklist. In the next stage, gathered information was analysed using Computerised Fire Safety Evaluation System (CFSES) software. This method was developed based on the NFPA 101 standard and evaluated the fire risk from four dimensions of containment, extinguishment, people movement and general safety. This software gives the risk assessment results in three areas of fire control, exits and general safety. To assess the fire risk of the commercial buildings after entering the background information (height, age, number of stories, etc.) in the software, the software first calculates the score that the building should obtain in the three aspects of fire control, exit routes and general safety (minimum score required). Findings The utmost zones in the case studies (44.3%) occupied by limited mobility are located at low-rise buildings or at the first floor to third floor of the hospital buildings. Hospitals managements lacked in creating the maximum exit route and egress the occupants to disclosed the building during evacuation, it correlates to the patients' mobility positions strategy to assign their categories that fell on effortless mobilisation. Surveyed hospitals were built with the non-combustible materials, even though four of the case studies were built before 1984. Hospitals were equipped with hazard separations and vertical smoke pores, and in most of the zones, sprinkler system is installed only in the corridors, equipped with communication system and system of communication with fire and relief organisations and has a fire detection and alarm system throughout the building. Results of fire risk assessment on four groups of elements were tested via CFSES revealed from 122 zones of surveyed hospitals; 102 or 84% of zones give the highest failed rate to comply the NFPA 101 requirements in terms of people movement in the building. The high-occupied Penang General Hospital contributed as the highest case study for not complying with the minimum requirements in all dimensions: people movement elements (41 zones), fire containment (31 zones), fire extinguisher (31 zones) and general safety (20). Fire extinguishment (62 zones) recorded the highest numbers of zones that complied with NFPA 101 (2013). The overall results of the fire risk assessment suggested that in terms of the fire control, egress and general safety aspects, the fire risk assessment score was unacceptable (failed) in all hospital buildings studied, and in the three areas mentioned, the general safety, egress/exit routes and fire control were in a worse status in terms of the score obtained in the software. None of the surveyed hospital received the minimum safety score in the three areas mentioned. The involvement of Emergency Response Team is crucial to overcome this egress or fire exit requirement and parameters. Research limitations/implications Several limitations exist in this research that cannot be controlled. Firstly, the occupancy rates only determined during peak hour. Accessibility into hospital compound permitted only during daytime. Secondly, the fire safety audits and fire safety risk management in this research are not being conducted by a professional architect or engineer and as a result must be relied on the direct inspection checklist to create valid results. Thirdly, this research has some limitations which need to be noted but does not affect the robustness of the study’s findings. This study focuses only on five selected public hospitals in one state of the northern region of Malaysia and excluded data gathering from all other parts of Malaysia. The perception of hospital operators regarding fire safety issues from different state hospitals may allow comparisons. Practical implications The findings of this paper should make a key practical contribution to the body of knowledge. In practice, the proposed framework should expand the knowledge of public hospital fire safety management plan concerning the level of fire safety compliance with the requirements in government hospital buildings and develop a fire safety management plan framework for government hospital buildings. Social implications This paper develops an early framework component related to the occupants’ safety which gives the basis for future research in hospital fire safety settings as it imparts early investigation into the consequence of investigating the phenomenon from the operators’ perspective as an attempt to improve public health-care fire safety performance in hospitals. Originality/value This paper has created a few measurement tools that can be applied among public hospital buildings stakeholders to perform the fire safety audit and risk management and rate the performance of Fire Safety Management in public hospitals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Facilities Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Facilities Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfm-11-2021-0138\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Facilities Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfm-11-2021-0138","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文旨在通过火灾风险管理评估马来西亚政府医院建筑的消防安全符合法律要求的水平。设计/方法/方法选定了五所政府医院。选择这五家医院是因为槟城的位置,槟城是马来西亚快速发展的州之一(沙勒,2019年;Ebekozien, 2019)。这个州是人口密度第二高的州,仅次于吉隆坡卫理亚州,平均每平方公里有1490人。人口增加导致公众对医疗保健服务的需求增加(DOSM, 2016)。观察和建筑审计过程如下所述。我们拍摄了数百张照片进行定性分析,并对每家医院的所有消防安全要素进行了测量,以进行描述性分析。审计要素框架是根据生命安全规范:NFPA 101 (2018), UBBL 1984:第VII部分(消防要求)和第viii部分(火灾报警器,火灾探测,灭火和消防通道)创建的。根据NFPA生命安全规范(也称为NFPA 101),在案例研究中进行横断面描述性评估。为了进行研究,研究者根据NFPA 101标准从CFSES软件中提取了评估消防安全状况所需的信息,并编制了清单。在下一阶段,收集到的信息将使用计算机消防安全评估系统(CFSES)软件进行分析。该方法以NFPA 101标准为基础,从密闭、灭火、人员移动和一般安全四个维度对火灾风险进行了评估。该软件给出了消防控制、出口和一般安全三个方面的风险评估结果。在软件中输入背景信息(高度、年龄、层数等)后,对商业建筑的火灾风险进行评估,软件首先计算出该建筑在消防、出口通道和一般安全三个方面应获得的分数(最低分数要求)。研究结果:在病例研究中,活动受限的最大区域(44.3%)位于低层建筑或医院建筑的一至三层。医院管理缺乏创建最大的出口路线和疏散期间疏散人员的出口,这与患者的移动位置策略相关,分配他们的类别落在毫不费力的动员上。被调查的医院是用不燃材料建造的,尽管其中四个案例研究是在1984年之前建造的。医院设置了危险隔离带和垂直排烟孔,大部分区域仅在走廊安装了喷水灭火系统,配备了通信系统和与消防和救援机构的通信系统,并在整个建筑物中安装了火灾探测和报警系统。利用被调查医院122个分区的CFSES对4组要素的火灾风险评价结果进行检验;102或84%的区域在符合NFPA 101要求方面的失败率最高,即建筑物内的人员移动。占用率很高的槟城总医院是在人员流动要素(41个区域)、防火(31个区域)、灭火器(31个区域)和一般安全(20个区域)等所有方面不符合最低要求的最高案例。消防(62个区域)记录了符合NFPA 101(2013)的最高区域数量。火灾风险评估的总体结果表明,在所研究的所有医院建筑中,在消防、出口和一般安全方面,火灾风险评估得分均为不可接受(不及格),而在上述三个方面,一般安全、出口/出口路线和消防控制在软件中获得的得分中处于较差的状态。接受调查的医院中没有一家在上述三个方面获得最低安全评分。紧急反应小组的参与对于克服该出口或消防出口的要求和参数至关重要。研究局限性/启示本研究存在一些无法控制的局限性。首先,入住率只在高峰时段确定。仅在白天允许进入医院大院。其次,本研究中的消防安全审计和消防安全风险管理不是由专业建筑师或工程师进行的,因此必须依靠直接检查清单来创建有效的结果。第三,本研究存在一些需要注意的局限性,但这并不影响研究结果的稳健性。 这项研究只关注马来西亚北部地区一个州的五家选定的公立医院,并排除了从马来西亚所有其他地区收集的数据。医院经营者对不同州立医院的消防安全问题的看法可以进行比较。本文的研究结果将对知识体系做出关键的实际贡献。在实践中,所提出的框架应扩大公立医院消防安全管理计划对政府医院建筑消防安全符合性要求水平的认识,并制定政府医院建筑消防安全管理计划框架。本文开发了一个与居住者安全相关的早期框架组件,为未来医院消防安全设置的研究奠定了基础,因为它赋予了从运营商角度调查这一现象的早期调查结果,试图改善医院公共卫生保健消防安全绩效。本文创造了一些测量工具,可以应用于公立医院建筑利益相关者进行消防安全审计和风险管理,并对公立医院消防安全管理的绩效进行评级。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fire risk assessment of Malaysia public hospital buildings
Purpose This paper aims to evaluate the level of compliance of fire safety with the legal requirements in Malaysia government hospital buildings by evaluating via fire risk management. Design/methodology/approach Five government hospitals were selected. These five hospitals were selected due to the location of Penang, which is one of the fast-growing states in Malaysia (Salleh, 2019; Ebekozien, 2019). This state is the second most densely populated state after Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, with an average distribution of 1,490 persons per square km. This higher population caused the higher demand on the health-care services by the public (DOSM, 2016). The observation and building audit processes are as described. Hundreds of photos were taken for qualitative analysis, and all fire safety elements were measured for the descriptive analysis for each hospital. The framework of audit elements is created based on the Life Safety Code: NFPA 101 (2018), UBBL 1984: Part VII (Fire Requirements) and Part VIIII (Fire Alarms, Fire Detection, Fire Extinguishment and Fire Fighting Access). The cross-sectional descriptive evaluation is conducted in the case studies building in accordance with Life Safety Code of NFPA, also known as NFPA 101. To conduct the study, the information needed to assess the fire safety status was extracted from the CFSES software based on the NFPA 101 standard and prepared and compiled by the researcher as a checklist. In the next stage, gathered information was analysed using Computerised Fire Safety Evaluation System (CFSES) software. This method was developed based on the NFPA 101 standard and evaluated the fire risk from four dimensions of containment, extinguishment, people movement and general safety. This software gives the risk assessment results in three areas of fire control, exits and general safety. To assess the fire risk of the commercial buildings after entering the background information (height, age, number of stories, etc.) in the software, the software first calculates the score that the building should obtain in the three aspects of fire control, exit routes and general safety (minimum score required). Findings The utmost zones in the case studies (44.3%) occupied by limited mobility are located at low-rise buildings or at the first floor to third floor of the hospital buildings. Hospitals managements lacked in creating the maximum exit route and egress the occupants to disclosed the building during evacuation, it correlates to the patients' mobility positions strategy to assign their categories that fell on effortless mobilisation. Surveyed hospitals were built with the non-combustible materials, even though four of the case studies were built before 1984. Hospitals were equipped with hazard separations and vertical smoke pores, and in most of the zones, sprinkler system is installed only in the corridors, equipped with communication system and system of communication with fire and relief organisations and has a fire detection and alarm system throughout the building. Results of fire risk assessment on four groups of elements were tested via CFSES revealed from 122 zones of surveyed hospitals; 102 or 84% of zones give the highest failed rate to comply the NFPA 101 requirements in terms of people movement in the building. The high-occupied Penang General Hospital contributed as the highest case study for not complying with the minimum requirements in all dimensions: people movement elements (41 zones), fire containment (31 zones), fire extinguisher (31 zones) and general safety (20). Fire extinguishment (62 zones) recorded the highest numbers of zones that complied with NFPA 101 (2013). The overall results of the fire risk assessment suggested that in terms of the fire control, egress and general safety aspects, the fire risk assessment score was unacceptable (failed) in all hospital buildings studied, and in the three areas mentioned, the general safety, egress/exit routes and fire control were in a worse status in terms of the score obtained in the software. None of the surveyed hospital received the minimum safety score in the three areas mentioned. The involvement of Emergency Response Team is crucial to overcome this egress or fire exit requirement and parameters. Research limitations/implications Several limitations exist in this research that cannot be controlled. Firstly, the occupancy rates only determined during peak hour. Accessibility into hospital compound permitted only during daytime. Secondly, the fire safety audits and fire safety risk management in this research are not being conducted by a professional architect or engineer and as a result must be relied on the direct inspection checklist to create valid results. Thirdly, this research has some limitations which need to be noted but does not affect the robustness of the study’s findings. This study focuses only on five selected public hospitals in one state of the northern region of Malaysia and excluded data gathering from all other parts of Malaysia. The perception of hospital operators regarding fire safety issues from different state hospitals may allow comparisons. Practical implications The findings of this paper should make a key practical contribution to the body of knowledge. In practice, the proposed framework should expand the knowledge of public hospital fire safety management plan concerning the level of fire safety compliance with the requirements in government hospital buildings and develop a fire safety management plan framework for government hospital buildings. Social implications This paper develops an early framework component related to the occupants’ safety which gives the basis for future research in hospital fire safety settings as it imparts early investigation into the consequence of investigating the phenomenon from the operators’ perspective as an attempt to improve public health-care fire safety performance in hospitals. Originality/value This paper has created a few measurement tools that can be applied among public hospital buildings stakeholders to perform the fire safety audit and risk management and rate the performance of Fire Safety Management in public hospitals.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
15.80%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Journal of Facilities Management is a strategic level journal for Heads of Facilities and Corporate Real Estate. Guided by its international and expert Editorial Board, Journal of Facilities Management publishes high-quality, authoritative, and detailed analysis, briefings and case studies on how facilities can and do play a vital part in helping deliver corporate strategy. This quarterly publication features contributions from leading practitioners and thinkers in the field of Facilities Management, from some of the leading companies, government institutions, and universities in the world. The journal features a combination of theoretical and practical articles, complemented by a wide range of case studies and regular features, identifying key implications for senior practitioners in Facilities Management.
期刊最新文献
Identifying the key variables affecting condominium real estate appraisal in the context of Al Bireh City, Palestine: a literature and questionnaire-based approach The impact of sustainable design and construction upon FM: four case studies An in-depth analysis of facility management approaches in Nigeria's ailing healthcare sector Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on commercial housing demand in Vietnam The effect of blockchain on accounting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1