5th September 2005
Long Haul Medical Issues
|
|
by Michelle Doherty -- Source: PIA Air Safety Publication
|
|
While pilots are often cited as having fitness
and longevity levels that exceed those who
work in non-flying professions, there are
certain factors that have raised concerns in the past
and need to be considered in the operation of long-
haul flights. With modern aircraft promising to increase
flight times still further, medical specialists are using
previously gathered data in an attempt to foresee
problems that may arise when flight times increase.
Over the years, one of the prime health concerns
to those who fly regularly has centered on whether
flight crew have an increased risk of cancer
due to prolonged exposure to high doses
of cosmic radiation. This has led to
a number of studies into this matter
including one carried out by the
California Department of Health
Services on Cabin crew, which
found that there was a twofold
increase in the risk of melanoma
skin cancer and that breast cancer
was 30% higher.
The World Health Organization
(WHO) says that while airline crews are
subjected to higher levels of naturally occurring
radiation than the general public, levels are still low.
Dr. Ian Perry, an aviation medical expert who sits on
a number of advisory panels, believes that there is
too much blame placed on flying and that such illnesses
may have more to do with airline crew's "lifestyle and irregular diet over the years." He also says that
crews go to more exotic locations and are therefore
exposed more frequently to sunlight which in turn
means they have a higher risk of skin cancer.
At a seminar on The Aeromedical Challenges
of Ultra-long Haul Flying held at the Royal
Aeronautical Society (RAes) in London in April 2004,
Dr. Michael Bagshaw of British Airways (BA)
presented a paper on cosmic radiation. Bagshaw
discussed how at low altitudes we are protected from
cosmic radiation by the Earth's magnetic field. The
area over the equator enjoys the greatest
protection with zero protection offered over the geomagnetic poles and - somewhat anomalously - reduced levels of
protection over an area in the South
Atlantic. Air travel at altitude can take
us beyond this protective 'blanket' and
increases our exposure to cosmic
radiation. With ULH flights setting
to favor the use of polar routes in
travel, it is clear that exposure on these
flights will be even greater.
We are all exposed to 'background'
radiation, measured in milliSieverts (mSv),
throughout our daily lives and the International
Radiological Protection Commission suggests a
General Public limit dose of one mSv per year in
excess of exposure to background levels. Placed in
context, this equates to eight return transatlantic flights or five antipodean return flights in a year. Supersonic
aircraft travel at higher altitude and as a result iust
100 hours per year of supersonic flight is enough to
expose an individual to the recommended maximum dose. These guidelines are intended for passengers, for Cabin and Flight Crew, an occupational exposure limit of 20mSv per year is set instead.
Bagshaw explained how radiation exposure is
calculated by taking a flight, its profile and airports
used and then measuring the altitude, latitude and
longitude of the flight as well as other contributory
factors - such as the solar cycle. This is generally
carried out using a range of computer programmes
specifically designed for this task. While there have
been reports of increased risk during times of solar
flare, cosmic radiations itself "is a fairly constant flux," says Bagshaw.
BA has carried out a number of studies into
radiation levels in flight crew and continues to monitor
this issue. In one such study, flight crew levels were
measured against those recorded in people working
in other areas of industry. While the maximum levels
recorded in flight crew were almost equivalent to those
seen in people working in the nuclear fuel industry,
the statistical average fell well below this rate.
So how does the overall picture look? Between
1950 and 1992, BA monitored 6,209 pilots and 1,153
flight engineers comprising 143,500 person years of
observation. The results were encouraging and
revealed that life expectancy for long haul crew was
four to five years better than that of the average
recorded in members of the public - with short haul
crew having an increased life expectancy of two to
three years. Although radiation levels are known to
present a heightened risk of leukaemia, they were
found to be far less than expected in those studied -
in fact there was no occupational increase in cancer
levels, bar that of melanoma.
Fatigue
The effects of fatigue in flight crew have also
been repeatedly flagged up as a health care issue by
both the aviation medical professionals and pilots
themselves. At the Royal Aeronautical Society
seminar, Dr. Ian Hosegood of Emirates Airlines
discussed how the airline is looking at this issue.
Also to be brought into use by Singapore Airlines
and Canadian Airlines, the four-engine 313-seater
aircraft has a range of 8,360 nm (16,000 km) and will
enable the airline to extend its operations to the east
and west coast of the USA although it is likely to be
used on shorter routes initially.
According to Hosegood, "there has been scant
data on the medical effects of flying over 14 hours
with pilot fatigue having been traditionally viewed as
an industrial issue." Hosegood says that for the first
time, safety is going to be dependent on flight crew
being well-rested and that a paradigm shift in how
this matter is approached by regulators is needed as
the existing "football team approach" will no longer
suffice.
Emirates has been busy reviewing scientific
literature on the effects of fatigue using in-house
expertise on this matter as well as that of Qinetiq and
Harvard University and a number of other
organizations conducting research in this area. Within
the aviation industry, information from the United
Augmented Flight Study, NASA and DERA reports
and the results of the Emirates Pilot Questionnaire
was reviewed. ULR meetings and workshops
provided another source of information particularly
as did those held by the Flight Safety Foundation in
recent years.
Alternative modelling is to be carried out and
Hosegood said, "we need to work out how much sleep
crew get and what it's worth - for example we know
it's important that crew rest at circadian lows." It
has been found that if a rest period is simply split
down the middle, crew are often fatigued. Having
two sleep opportunities should ensure that at least
one is successfully used and this is also said to reduce
crew anxiety. Other ways that Emirates is planning
to tackle this matter include a "stepwise" increment
in sector lengths whereby crew can become slowly
accustomed to flying longer sectors, integration into
the company Fatigue Risk Management Systems
(FRMS) and light exposure - although this is still seen
as a tricky thing to get right and may potentially cause
more of a problem if done incorrectly.
Educating crew and management and carefully
devising rosters is also a key step in improving matters.
Flight crew, especially, need to be armed with the knowledge to make "tactical decisions" and devise
personal strategies for ensuring they are as well rested
as possible and that they look at factors such as
exercise, diet and caffeine intake and have a strategic
plan for each route.
With plans to eventually use two captains and two first officers on the planned long haul A340 flights,
Emirates has initially approved the use of the "City
Pair" system whereby crew fly out and back in single
sectors. Various designs of crew rest facilities are
being looked at for onboard the new aircraft. Flight
crew will be segregated from cabin crew and considerations include: noise / vibration, temperature / humidity, bedding, ablutions and relaxation as well as full IFE facilities.
In further fatigue modelling, testing and
validation, Emirates will be using data gathered from
using wrist actometers such Actiwatch. This "watch
like" device can be worn by pilots to test fatigue levels
and can be plugged into a laptop computer where
data - similar to that seen in an electro-cardiogram -
is downloaded and analyzed.
Other ways in which fatigue will be measured
include using electro-encephalograms (EEC) and
electro-oculograms (EOG), and sleep logs as well
getting crew to participate in Psychomotor Vigilance
Tasks (PVT).
However, one of the onegoing issues, says Dr.
Hosegood, is the recognition that everyone is different
and with this in mind it is difficult to know whether to
model on the average or the worst case. Another
factor to be considered is integrating with current Flight
Time Limitation (FTL) schemes.
Recognizing the risks posed by fatigue, a number
of organizations have published advice on alertness
management. In their Guide, the Air Transport
Association provides basic information on the
physiological causes of fatigue and also prescribes
some preventive and operational fatigue
countermeasures. As well as obvious measures such
as developing good sleeping habits and trying to
minimize sleep loss, there is information on strategies
that actively reset the body's circadian clock.
Operational countermeasures include increasing
social interaction and conversation, taking exercise and also the use of caffeine during a flight.
The Guide also cites ajoint National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA) and Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) study in which
crewmembers who were allowed to take planned naps
showed better performance (34 percent) and higher
physiological alertness (100 percent) during the last
90 minutes of flight than the control group
crewrnembers who had not napped.
The FAA does not currently sanction this
practice, but research is ongoing and there are always
going to be opportunities for 'strategic naps' outside
of the cockpit. Napping is the only operational
countermeasure that addresses one of the major
physiological causes of fatigue - the need for sleep -
and reverses it. While other operational
countermeasures primarily mask fatigue, naps actually
reduce it.
BA, as with many airlines, takes flight crew
fatigue extremely seriously and has been taking steps
to address this issue. Representatives from the airline
have attended a Fatigue Countermeasure course run
by NASA and then devised a training module, which
is given to all flight and cabin crew. Flight crew receive
this as part of their annual refresher course in aviation
medicine, and cabin crew as part of their Crew
Resource Management (CRM) training. As well as
classroom sessions, printed notes summarize what
they have been taught and highlight details on topics
such as sleep scheduling, good sleep habits and
napping. Long-haul crew also receive "preventative
and operational recommendations, individualized to
the operations they are flying." This translates as route
and time specific advice cards for every long-haul
sector flown by British Airways developed from a
concept pioneered by Airbus Industries.
Stress
Stress and fatigue can be closely related and
there are a number of environmental issues that can
contribute to the levels of nervous tension in flight
crew. For example, with aircraft travelling at
increasingly high speeds it is vital that pilots have a
high degree of alertness and are able to concentrate
for the long periods of time required. This is especially
true in poor weather and night conditions where there is an increased risk of an accident as visual references
are lost. During such difficult conditions, pilots need
to be extra vigilant and ensure that flight instruments
are accurately monitored and this is naturally very
tiring.
On long haul operations, the design of the cockpit
itself can be an important contributory factor when
measuring stress and fatigue levels. As well as ease
of instrument use, heating and ventilation are important
in maintaining comfort levels thereby reducing stress
and areas of distraction.
Altitude can cause stress, particularly below
5,000 feet as this is where the greatest atmospheric
changes generally occur and flight crew can suffer
from trapped gases within the body. Common health
problems such as a common cold can cause significant
ear and sinus discomfort during descent.
'Self-imposed' Stress
While fatigue may generally be the main cause
of stress amongst the pilot community, the lifestyle
itself has much to answer for. A long-haul pilot is less
likely to have a stable home life and multiple marriages
are common. With divorce and relationship problems
being high on the list of life's stressful events, this is a
factor that can push an indivdual to a high point of
anxiety and potentially into alcohol and drug abuse.
Many flight crew indulge in activities that are
not always conducive to promoting good health. These
do not only have adverse effects on their physical
and mental well-being but can also be a real threat
to safety. An acronym often used to list these factors
is DEATH which stands for "Drugs, exhaustion,
alcohol, tobacco and hypoglycaemia."
Psychological Problems
While the vast majority of pilots are extremely
competent people of sound mind, they are not immune
to the psychological disorders anymore than any other
sections of the working public. A pilot's flying life -
especially when flying long-haul routes - can be very
stressful and it is important that colleagues or line
managers are able to quickly respond to warning signs
of psychological distress.
A case of what can happen when these warning
signs are not observed is that of Gamil el Batouti, relief pilot of Egyptair Flight 990 who was thought to
have crashed the aircraft on purpose. Post accident
reports indicate that Batouti may have been an "acute
psychotic" and that there were numerous warning
signs that should have been noted. He was said to
have exhibited frequent mood changes and was
argumentative and was also said to have been invoked
in a number of high-risk activities.
In light of this tragic event, the US National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) suggested that
it might be prudent for the industry to introduce
psychological profiling of pilots. This suggestion
caused outrage amongst the US pilot population who
thought it would be ineffective and an invasion of
privacy.
Aerotoxic Syndrome
While rare, there have been various reports on
crew suffering health problems due to cabin vapours
caused by either leaking engine oil or faulty air
conditioning units. Exposure to such fumes can cause
symptoms that range from skin, nose, eye and
respiratory irritation through to neurological
dysfunction and chronic fatigue syndrome. Chris
Winder, from the School of Safety Science at the
University of New South Wales, Australia says that
any aircraft that leaks oil can cause such problems
and said this can include Boeing 757, Airbus A320,
BAe146 and MD80 types. A recent report by the
Australian Federation of Air Pilots, highlighted the
problem and cited details from a number of recent
surveys that revealed the extent of the problem.
One of the most recent of these was an analysis
of 21 BAe146 pilots who had experienced diarrhoea,
recurring headaches, and intolerance to certain types
of food and alcohol as well as brain impairment.
These toxic vapours are said to range from "light blue
to a black cloud and can smell like strong blue
cheese," according to members of a research project
on this matter.
Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)
In recent years, Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)
has received more coverage - at least in the popular media - than any other air travel related issues.
Michael Reynolds has set up 'Airhealth.org', a non-
profit-making organization dedicated to educating air
travellers on the risks of DVT. Reynolds and his team
are quick to point out that the popularly termed
'economy class syndrome' is a condition which has the potential to affect all air travellers, pilots included. Quoting Dr. David McKenas, medical director at American Airlines, the website states that 'the most common causes of sudden pilot incapacitation are cardiac arrest, arrhythmia, and fainting', all of which are often caused by a blood clot in the lung.
Indeed, 5% of DVT sufferers who have
contacted the website are pilots. In contrast to flight
attendants who exercise enough during a flight to
reduce the risk of DVT, pilots tend to move around
less and the risk is higher, especially if coagulability
is already high from a previous flight and they fall
asleep sitting upright.
Airhealth's stance is supported by a number of
studies such as Gianni Belcaro's LONFLIT series.
However, in a presentation to the Royal Society of
Medicine in London in January 2002, Dr. Michael
Bagshaw, pointed to Swiss research published in 2001
which found professional pilots were less likely to
suffer DVT than the general population, and that 16
out of 27 pilots who did had well recognized, pre-disposing factors.
There are, of course, many acute, short-term
conditions or illnesses brought on by working as flight
crew. The diet and eating patterns can suffer due to
time zone changes and can lead to number of medical
issues within individuals. In exotic locations, crew may be more susceptible to food poisoning or may be exposed to contagious illnesses as in the case of the recent Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) outbreak. Another very serious health risk is hypoxia which is an issue in its own right and can affect crew on both short and long haul flights.
Also referred to as "mountain sickness", hypoxia is a condition that can be caused by flying at altitude and can cause a pilot's mental coordination to slow down and may potentially reduce night vision. According to Group Captain David Gradwell, Consultant adviser in Aviation Medicine with the Royal Airforce, it is a condition that can affect even the fittest and youngest of pilots and there is no known predictor of susceptibility. Although it is extremely rare for flight crew to be affected by hypoxia, it is a potentially serious condition and there are often no symptoms. Research into this condition is ongoing with much of it being carried out in conjunction with aircraft air quality studies. One of the most notable studies has been instigated by the European Union (EU) and is primarily looking at lowering cabin altitude.
So will the ULH flights of the future pose an increased medical risk to flight crew? Certainly the view of the speakers at the RAeS seminar is that jury is still out on this matter. It is clear that fatigue is the primary concern and that crew on these flights will be carefully monitored. It could even be that ULH
flights will prove safer if crews are doubled up and have adequate rest facilities onboard. It will be interesting to see what further research and monitoring on this matter will reveal.