Retrospective analysis reveals distinct ignition sources in university laboratories, suggesting the need for discipline-specific safety inspection checklists.
This study analyzed the characteristics of fire and explosion accidents in university laboratories based on the type of ignition cause and developed a safety inspection checklist based on risk factors derived from actual accident cases. A total of 112 fire and explosion accidents reported to the National Research Safety Information System (NRSIS) from 2015 to 2024 were analyzed. Based on the accident descriptions, the ignition causes were classified into five types: open flames and heating equipment, reactive substances, pressurized and gas vessels, electrical equipment, and flammable liquids. Open flames and heating equipment accounted for the largest proportion (49 cases; 43.8%), followed by reactive substances (39 cases; 34.8%). A statistically significant association was identified between the ignition cause types and laboratory types, with open- flame accidents tending to be concentrated in medical and biological laboratories, and reactive substance accidents in chemical laboratories. Based on these findings, a safety inspection checklist consisting of 21 items across the five types was developed, with applicable laboratory types indicated for each item to enable selective application according to the laboratory characteristics. The proposed checklist is distinguished by deriving items directly from actual laboratory accident cases, thereby providing an empirical basis for item composition. Following further validation, it is expected to serve as a practical tool that complements existing regulation-oriented inspection systems in identifying fire and explosion hazards in university laboratories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dong-Kyu Hwang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: