©
Guldmann 09/2013 # 9006
59_1
©
Guldmann 09/2013 # 9006
59_1
6
Sling inspection system
Development of a specific procedure and program for the inspec
-
tion of slings at your facility is your best safeguard. Consider em-
ploying a three part system of inspection. Slings that are removed
from service and are not capable of repair should be disposed of
so they are unfit for any future use and can not find a way back
into active inventory.
1) Initial
This level of inspection is done at the time that the sling is re-
ceived into your facility. The inspector should insure that no dam-
age has occurred during transit, and also verify that the sling work
load limits match those contained in the manufacturer’s catalogue.
If your facility documents the sling inspection process through writ-
ten inspection records, the paper trail should begin at this stage
2) frequent
The frequent level of inspection should be done by the sling user
before each use. The sling should be examined and removed
from service if damage is detected. The sling user should also
determine that the sling is proper for the user conditions, care task
required and the required weight capacity.
3) Periodic
Your facility might want to consider implementing a program for a
periodic level of inspection at regular intervals. The interval should
be based upon the frequency of use, severity of the service cycle
and information derived through the inspection process. Recom-
mendations to prevent damage and enhance service life could
be made by staff that perform the periodic inspections. If written
inspection records are maintained, they should always reference
the unique sling identification number, and be updated to record
the condition of the sling. Not intended to represent all potential
inspection steps or all potential aspects of product management
program. Judgment of inspector/site prevails.
Sling inspection technique
The sling inspection procedure should be thorough, systematic
and consistent; both visual and “hands on” inspection techniques
are recommended. Certain forms of damage are far more discern-
able through hands-on inspection, than by visual inspection. For
example, fabric stiffness, crushed webbing, as well as, thinning
fabric can be identified through tactile inspection. Visual inspec
-
tion alone may not reveal all forms of sling damage. Once signs
of damage have been identified, do not downgrade the work
load limit of the sling, with the intent of continuing to use it, but at
limited capacity or frequency. This is sometimes done to get more
service life out of a damaged sling. The operating rule and stand-
ard should be: intact = use; damage = do not use.
Consider the practice of documenting sling inspections through
written inspection records. The documentation should include
information such as: the name of manufacturer, the sling stock
number, width and length, the unique sling identification number
(important in differentiating similar slings), as well as the condition
of the sling. Other important information might also include the
date it was received or put into use at your facility and any special
features (if applicable). A beneficial outcome of an inspection pro
-
gram would be the realization of repetitive forms of damage and
the analysis that would lead to specific recommendations.
Sample visual examples of synthetic sling damage
x
)
Chemical/caustic burns
Broken stitching
Crushed / Frayed webbing
Knots
Melting / Charring
x
)
sample visual images not intended to
represent all types of potential damage
3.02 Lifetime
The sling is designed for short-term use by one particular user and
is to be discarded when soiled or not longer needed.
4.00 Technical specifications
Lifting capacity, SWL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350 kg (770 lbs)
Material. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Polyester
5.00 EC-Declaration of conformity
The product is manufactured in compliance with the
Council Directive 93/42/EEC of June 14th 1993, including
amendments, as medical device class 1.
