@article{ref1,
title="Evaluation of winter footwear: comparison of test methods to determine footwear slip resistance on ice surfaces",
journal="International journal of environmental research and public health",
year="2021",
author="Dutta, Tilak and Fernie, Geoff and Cheng, Wayne and Wong, Gordon and Gauvin, Chantal and Li, Yue and Roshan Fekr, Atena",
volume="18",
number="2",
pages="e405-e405",
abstract="The use of slip-resistant winter footwear is crucial for the prevention of slips and falls on ice and snow. The main objective of this paper is to evaluate a mechanical  testing method to determine footwear slip resistance on wet and dry ice surfaces and  to compare it with the human-centred test method introduced by researchers at KITE  (Knowledge, Innovation, Talent, Everywhere)-Toronto Rehabilitation  Institute-University Health Network. Phase 1 of this study assessed the  repeatability and reproducibility of the mechanical method by evaluating ten  different occupational winter boots using two SATRA Slip resistance testers (STM  603, SATRA Technology Centre, Kettering, UK). One tester is located in Toronto and  one in Montreal. These boots were chosen based on the needs of the IRSST (Institut  de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail, Montréal, Quebec,  Canada), who were primarily interested in providing safe winter footwear for police,  firefighters and municipal workers. In Phase 2, the results of the human-centred  test approach were compared with the mechanical results. In Phase 3, two of these  boots with conflicting results from the previous phases were tested using a second  human-centred method. In Phase 1, the mechanical testing results obtained in the two  labs showed a high linear correlation (>0.94) and good agreement on both ice  surfaces; however, they revealed a bias (~0.06) between the two labs on the dry ice  condition. The mechanical and human-centred tests (phase 2) were found to be better  correlated in the wet ice condition (R = 0.95) compared to the dry ice condition (R  = 0.34). Finally, the rating of the footwear slip resistance based on the number of  slips counted in phase 3 was consistent with the rating by the human-centred test  method (phase 2), but not the mechanical method (phase 1). The findings of this  study provide a better understanding of the limitations of the SATRA ice tray for  measuring footwear slip resistance and demonstrate that the mechanical method must  be further refined to make it more comparable to the human-centred methods to  achieve better agreement with real-world performance.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1661-7827",
doi="10.3390/ijerph18020405",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18020405"
}