Detector in Care Home Smoking Lounge

[hmcb1976]

Hi all,

looking some advice from all you knowledgeable folk 

Care Home with a designated smoking room for residents. Fitted with a Photo Electric Detector, when there are 4-5 smokers in the room, fire alarm activates. This has resulted in a number of false alarms. ventilation system has been upgraded, no combustible materials in the room except clothing worn by the smokers.

Looking for people's opinion on what the best form of fire detection is?  I have recommended a fixed temp 57 Deg C heat detector, this has been refused by the registration body on the grounds that if somebody sets their clothing / hair on fire a heat detector will not activate quickly enough to prevent injury to the smoker. Is it not widely accepted that no detector will pick up this sort of fire rapidly enough to prevent injury / burns to the smoker??

 The inspector is insisting on a smoke detector being fitted to the room, would you good folk recommend an ionisation smoke detector?

Your thoughts would be warmly welcomed as I'm fighting a losing battle!!

Many thanks,

[kurnal]

There can be no evidence that any smoke detector will be so selective to identify that it is a persons clothing that is smouldering rather than cigarettes? BS 5839 generally seeks to raise an alarm for the protection of persons outside the room of origin.

If a person drops their cigarette onto their clothing it will smoulder and slowly burn through the clothes causing nasty skin burns long before producing enough smoke to operate a detector in any case. I saw this a couple of years ago when an old gentleman put his lit pipe in his pocket setting fire first to the inside of his pocket and his underwear causing a serious saucer size burn.

The best answer must surely be supervision for the most likely cause of injury and fire is whilst service users are using their lighters? Another case that led to a prosecution arose when an old gentleman could not pull open a packet of glacier mints and in frustration used his lighter to try and burn off the top of the packet burning his hands badly. In all respects he had been  deemed to be responsible to manage his own smoking materials prior to this incident.

I think the authorities are barking up the wrong tree but appreciate your dilemma. IMO they are trying to push their problem onto your shoulders. I don't think a smoke detector exists with the sensitivity to detect smouldering clothing but with the selectivity not to alarm if 4 or 5 people are smoking. Ventilation may stop the unwanted alarms but will it help with the smouldering clothing? No of course it will greatly delay any alarms arising from this.

Some people will suggest multi sensors as a solution - they may be successful in reducing alarms but not help in preventing injury from a clothing fire. Supervision is the answer.

[AnthonyB]

Supervision may be more appropriate as whilst smoke detectors are quick if someone's clothing is fully alight then by the time the head activates, someone checks the fire panel and realises it's the smoking lounge head that has activated (if addressable, otherwise it's search the zone time) and staff are sent it will be far far too late....

I'd ask what it's got to do with the CQC anyway, they don't enforce the Fire Safety Order....... Surely they should be partnership working with the FRS if they are concerned.

In a home I've dealt with that is in special measures with the CQC they limited their fire stuff to training and procedures and let the FRS deal in more depth with technical issues.

If you wanted to be devious (not that I would officially recommend it of course) you could fit a multi-sensor but have it programmed to heat only....

[wee brian]

No smoke detector (even the ones he has now) will prevent old geezers burning themselves - that's a job for the staff.

I'd look at a multi sensor to reduce the unwanted alarms.

[hmcb1976]

Hi all,

Many thanks for all your responses, all very helpful and basically the same as I had suggested.

The RQIA are a 'funny' bunch!!  Like to get a say in everything!!.

[Fire Monkey]

The type of detection depends on your goals - building protection is one thing - early warning another.

I would point out to the building owner/manager of their duty of care - are they showing the required responsibility by allowing certain people to smoke un-supervised (if in deed that is the case).

What about 2nd hand smoke in relation to carers?

Are you aware that some residents may have skin conditions that mean they are covered head to toe in a flammable cream. This has caused death.

I would presume the room doors is fire rated (FD30S) and has a closing device and the room is a fire rated compartment?

Would recommend a large fire blanket in the room.

Could the room be zoned and fitted with a heat and super low sensitivity smoke detector located on the wall?

Ensure there are sufficient ash trays and they are cleaned /emptied on a regular basis.

Oxygen users should not use the smoking room.

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Hills-2015-0317.pdf
https://www.leedssouthandeastccg.nhs.uk/content/uploads/2016/10/Emollients-Smoking.pdf
http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/warning-after-five-elderly-people-die-in-house-fires-in-two-weeks-1-7382931

[kurnal]

Is it reasonable to use staff who are smokers in their own right in respect of secondary smoking? Just askin!

Video monitoring, indeed video smoke detection may offer options for supervision?

[colin todd]

Tony, the gentleman said RQIA not CQC, so it is not the FSO that applies. And the RQIA do have fire safety within their scope so it has everything to do with them.

An ICSD would be better than an optical in relation to smoking, but a detector in the room may not save the life of a frail person who has set their clothing alight.  Multi sensors are not the answer to everything.  it would depends what manufacture of system is installed. Some company's multi sensors would not do much better against smoking than a conventional detector.

[AnthonyB]

Doesn't say anything other than registration body in the OP, my crystal ball is in for repair....

Perhaps posters should make clear where they are situated in order to use the right legislation and identify the AHJ

[Fishy]

Perhaps posters should make clear where they are situated in order to use the right legislation and identify the AHJ

Seconded... there have been numerous occasions where topics have a number of posts before it becomes clear that the wrong country was being discussed!

[colin todd]

That's why people should not rely on advice from random strangers down the pub.

[nearlythere]

Doesn't say anything other than registration body in the OP, my crystal ball is in for repair....

Perhaps posters should make clear where they are situated in order to use the right legislation and identify the AHJ

NI. Do you identify where you are before you you speak AB? You really should or you can confuse the issue. And what do you mean by "right" legislation? Is legislation wrong other than where you come from? And if you don't know what RQIA is you clearly aren't reading enough.

[nearlythere]

Perhaps posters should make clear where they are situated in order to use the right legislation and identify the AHJ

Seconded... there have been numerous occasions where topics have a number of posts before it becomes clear that the wrong country was being discussed!

NI. You too Fishy.
And pray tell where is the "wrong" country?

[kurnal]

And I was accused of being grumpy!

Posting history aside I judged this query to be pretty universal as I wager clothing ignites and burns the same irrespective of the geography.

And the CQC in England regularly overstep their mark and are rarely corrected in this by the AHJ!

[hmcb1976]

Hi all,

I think I should clarify a few points to clear up any confusion!!

I am based in Northern Ireland
Registration body is RQIA who basically fulfil the same role as CQC.
Working to the Fire Safety Regulations (NI) 2010 and NIFRS Order (NI) 2006.

I am not a gentleman, lady at her work 😀

With regards to the supervision that is our key strategy. Very detailed risk assessments are completed and assess the physical and cognitive ability of all the smokers. Degree of supervision can vary from residents holding their own smoking materials to residents who have their cigarettes held for them.

The smoking room is sterile, all furniture is fire retardant, tiled floor, metal ashtrays etc.
There is also a call bell in the room.
Oxygen users are not permitted in the room.
Fire blanket is in the room
I wrongly assumed that posters would connect RQIA with Northern Ireland so apologies about that.

Once again many thanks for all your responses and suggestions.