Lifeguarding Challenges

Every second counts in a drowning incident. The longer a victim is submerged, the greater the chance of permanent brain damage or death. If a lifeguard can spot a swimmer in distress within the first ten seconds of a drowning incident, and reach him to initiate aid within an additional twenty seconds, it is unlikely a drowning accident will occur.

But in many cases, this just doesn't happen.

Poseidon Technologies and Jeff Ellis and Associates performed two studies on lifeguard vigilance. Commissioned by Poseidon Technologies, the studies were designed to measure actual lifeguard performance in detecting drowning incidents and to identify the factors that influence lifeguard vigilance. The results point to causes that may be contributing to the more than 400 deaths occurring annually in public, lifeguarded swimming facilities in the United States.

The Jeff Ellis & Associates study, the first on-site study of its kind, calculated how quickly lifeguards could spot a swimmer in trouble underwater. Approximately 500  tests were performed on-site during the months of June, July and August 2001 at more than 90 U.S. pools that had no prior knowledge of the study, and that differed in size and type. In each case, a manikin was placed underwater in the pool; a tester started the clock when it was fully submerged.

See the press release about the studies

The study showed that on average, it took one minute and 14 seconds for lifeguards to spot the manikin. Lifeguards noted the presence of the manikin on only 46 occasions, or in 9% of the tests within 10 seconds, and in 30 seconds or less in 43% of the tests. In 41% of the tests it took over one minute; it took more than three minutes in 14% of the tests. :

The second study, titled Bibliographic Study on Lifeguard Vigilance, was written by vigilance experts at the Applied Anthropology Institute in Paris, France and published in September 2001. The institute is renowned worldwide for its work with major airline and car manufacturers, including Airbus. The study shows the environmental and job-related factors affecting lifeguard vigilance.

The Bibliographic Study on Lifeguard Vigilance (PDF format: 548KB)
An Executive Summary of this Study (PDF format: 126KB)

These include:

• Vigilance capacity cannot be maintained at an optimum level for more than 30 minutes. The detection of critical signals (signs of a swimmer in trouble) in this type of task is never 100%.
  
• Laboratory studies show that the vigilance level will be higher as the number of relevant signals increases and the amount of non-relevant signals (signals other than a swimmer in trouble) decreases. However, drowning incidents with their associated signals are rare, and they occur only randomly.
• Noise, one of the major environmental factors at a pool, generally has an unfavorable effect on lifeguard vigilance. Moreover, noise hinders the ability to share one's attention and tends to focus one's attention on the signals present in the central vision, to the detriment of those signals present in the peripheral vision.
• The performance of lifeguards can be affected by monotony, stress and fatigue. The particular environment in which the job is performed heightens the fragile nature of the performance.
• Heat is one of the factors that has a major effect on vigilance. Given the seasonal aspect of lifeguarding activities, lifeguards are often exposed to heat and to conditions that are not conducive to their performance. When the temperature is over 30°C / 86°F, vigilance is significantly reduced - by 45 percent.