Journal of Health and Safety at Work

---

Introduction: Work-related accidents may cause damage to people, environment and lead to waste of time and money. Health, Safety and Environment Management System has been developed in order to reduce accidents. This study aimed to investigate the effect of implementation of this system on reduction of the accidents and its consequences and also on the safety performance indices in Kermanshah Petrochemical Company.

.

Material and Method: In this study, records of accidents were collected by OSHA incident report form 301 over 4 years. Following, the mean annual accidents and its consequences and safety performance indices were calculated and reported. Then, using statistical analysis, the impacts of two years implementation of this system on the accidents and its consequences and safety performance indices were evaluated.

.

Result: The results showed that the implementation of HSE system was significantly correlated with Frequency Severity Indicator, Accident Severity Rate, lost days, minor accidents and total incidents (P-value <0.05). Moreover, the values of these variables have been reduced after implementation of this system. However, the system did not influence the Accident Frequency Rate and disabling accidents (P-value> 0.05).

.

Conclusion: The implementation of Health, Safety and the Environment Management System caused a reduction in accidents and its consequences and most of the safety performance indices in the entire process cycle of Kermanshah Petrochemical Company. Overall, safety condition has been improved considerably.

---

Introduction: Medical imaging modalities such as MRI and CT scans are indispensable for accurate diagnosis, yet they pose substantial operational and patient safety risks—particularly in resource-limited healthcare systems.
Material and Methods: This applied methodological study, conducted from July 2024 to April 2025, used a four-phase methodology: scoping, data collection, framework development, and risk analysis. Data were gathered through FGDs involving radiologists, technicians and HSE experts and also with semi-structured interviews and process mapping, which identified 125 failure modes across nine workflow stages. PFMEA assessed operational risks, whereas HFMEA focused on patient-centric hazards. A composite risk indicator that comprising 40% PFMEA RPN and 60% HFMEA hazard score, prioritized risks. Statistical analyses, including Shapiro-Wilk, Spearman’s correlation and Kruskal-Wallis tests, were used to evaluate risk distributions and inter-stage variability.
Results: The framework identified critical risks, such as insufficient operator training and staff fatigue, with post-process management and image reconstruction as high-risk phases. MRI and CT units showed distinct yet overlapping risk profiles that show significant inter-stage variability (p<0.001). The hybrid model integrated operational and clinical perspectives, which outperformed standalone FMEA methods.
Conclusion: This hybrid PFMEA-HFMEA framework offers a scalable and context-sensitive approach to enhance patient safety with operational resilience in medical imaging. Further studies should authenticate the framework in different settings and investigate long-term mitigation strategies to enhance radiology risk management.