Injury, Int. J.

Care Injured 43 (2012) 2001–2005

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Injury
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/injury

Mining injuries in Serbian underground coal mines – A 10-year study

Saša Stojadinović *, Igor Svrkota, Dejan Petrović, Miodrag Denić, Radoje Pantović, Vitomir Milić
University of Belgrade, Technical Faculty in Bor, Mining Department, VJ 12, 19 210 Bor, Serbia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Mining, especially underground coal mining, has always been a dangerous occupation. Injuries,
Accepted 17 August 2011 unfortunately, even those resulting in death, are one of the major occupational risks that all miners live
with. Despite the fact that all workers are aware of the risk, efforts must be and are being made to
Keywords: increase the safety of mines. Injury monitoring and data analysis can provide us with valuable data on
Coal mine the causes of accidents and enable us to establish a correlation between the conditions in the work
Injury environment and the number of injuries, which can further lead to proper preventive measures. This
Distribution
article presents the data on the injuries in Serbian coal mines during a 10-year period (2000–2009). The
Injury rate
presented results are only part of an ongoing study whose aim is to assess the safety conditions in
Serbian coal mines and classify them according to that assessment.
ß 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Introduction
Mining has a long tradition in the Serbian territory, from
prehistoric times, through the Roman Empire to the rise of the
Serbian Empire in the 12th century. Mining flourished during the
13th century under the rule of Serbian King Stefan Uros I1 and
culminated in the formulation of the first Serbian, and one of the first
European, Mining Codes, Despot Stefan Lazarevics’s ‘‘The law on the
holes (Zakon o rupama)’’, back in 1412.2,3 Coal mining in Serbia
began with the opening of the Senje coal mine (Senjski rudnik) in
1853, the Aleksinac coal mine (1883), Vrska Cuka (1884), Lubnica
(1889) and others during the 19th and early 20th centuries. Today,
there are nine active underground coal mines (with 12 underground
productive units) in Serbia and all of them operate under the Public
Enterprise for Underground Coal Mining Resavica (Javno preduzece
za podzemnu eksploataciju uglja Resavica-JP PEU).
Coal mining has always been a dangerous occupation.
Unfortunately, Serbian coal mining cannot be considered modern
due to the fact that the mining methods employed still incorporate
a high level of manual labour as well as the fact that mechanisation
and automation of processes are at an unfavourable level. Drilling
and blasting operations, the use of chain and belt conveyors for
coal hauling, confined spaces with narrow corridors, high ground
pressures, roof caving, the presence of methane, oxidation
processes in coal and the abandoned works are often the cause
of mining accidents. Fortunately, in most cases, the accidents
involve light injuries and individual cases of injury. Unfortunately,
Serbia has also had its share of big mining accidents, the biggest
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +381 60 4 807 819; fax: +381 30 421 078.
E-mail address: sstojadinovic@tf.bor.ac.rs (S. Stojadinović).
being a mine fire in Aleksinac in 1989, which claimed 90 lives and
the methane explosion in Soko in 1998, which claimed 30 lives.
Injuries in the mining industry, especially in coal mining, are
common and all miners are aware of the dangers of the mining
occupation. However, being aware of the danger and accepting the
occupational risk is surely not the best way of accident and injury
prevention. Consequently, it is essential to keep a record of the
injuries, analyse the conditions that caused the injury and use the
collected data and experience to prevent future injuries and the
loss of lives. Another aspect is, of course, the economic one. Injuries
are often, worldwide, related to the loss of work days and wages or
to productivity losses. The economic factor of the injury should not
be neglected and, surely, must not be the prevailing factor in
making decisions on the preventive measures application.
This article presents the results of a study which is still in progress
and whose basic goal is to analyse the data on the injuries and
identify the weak points or ‘hot spots’ in the mining process. The
final aim of the study is safety assessment, classification of the mines
according to that assessment and the formulation of recommended
preventive measures, but, even in the initial stage of the study, some
results can be presented and some conclusions drawn.
Materials and methods
This retrospective study includes the data on injuries from all
nine Serbian coal mines during a 10-year period, from 2000 to
2009, and is still in progress. Prior to the study, a number of
literature sources4–9 were consulted in order to define the best
possible methodology for assessment. All data on the injuries were
gathered from the mine injuries logs and monthly and annual
injury reports and implemented into a single database. The data
were collected and analysed for each coal mine separately, and also

0020–1383/$ – see front matter ß 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.injury.2011.08.018
2002 S. Stojadinović et al. / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 43 (2012) 2001–2005

cumulatively for the whole Public enterprise Resavica (JP PEU), and
these cumulative data have been presented in this study.
Serbian regulations classify occupational injuries according to
the degree of injury as light (L), heavy (H) and fatal (F) and this
classification was used in our study. The equivalent classification of
the US Mining Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)10
identifies the degree of injury as: no days lost (NDL), non-fatal
with days lost (NFDL) and fatal (F). The explanation of the degree of
injury is almost identical in Serbian regulations and the MSHA.
Thus, fatal injuries are those occurrences resulting in death; heavy
injuries are non-fatal occurrences resulting in days away from
work, statutory days charged, or days of restricted work activity;
and light injuries are occurrences with no lost workdays; hence,
non-fatal injury occurrences result only in temporary loss of
consciousness or medical treatment other than first aid.
All of the injured workers were classified into four age groups.
The first group included workers whose age ranged from 20 (or
less) to 30 years. This group included young, inexperienced
workers and young workers with several years of experience.
The age of workers in the second group ranged from 31 to 40 years
and it included young workers with 10 or more years of experience.
The third group comprised workers whose age ranged from 41 to
50 years and who had 20 or more years of experience. Finally, the
fourth group included older, experienced workers whose age
ranged from 51 to 60 (or more) years.
There are various classifications regarding the location of the
injury, that is, the body part10–12 and this study accepted the
classification used in the injury reports from JP PEU Resavica. JP PEU
uses the classification specifying eight ‘conditional’ body parts and
that classification was accepted here. The monitored body parts
were: (1) head; (2) eye, ear or face; (3) internal organs; (4) poisoning;
(5) upper limb; (6) lower limb; (7) chest, back or neck; and (8) other.
Mining operations in all coal mines are organised in a four
brigade system and three 8-h shifts, with each brigade working
2 days in the first shift (0–15 h), 2 days in the second shift (15–
23 h), 2 days in the third shift (23–07 h) and 2 days rest.
Qualification structure, that is, the educational background of the
injured workers, was also considered in the study. The workers were
categorised into six groups, according to the educational level and
Serbian qualification classification. The groups were VSS (higher
education) – university degree or higher (16 or more years of
education in total); SSS (secondary education) – 4 years secondary
school (12 YET). VKV (highly qualified), KV (qualified) and PK (semi-
qualified) are internal qualifications and, generally, are not based
upon the educational level, but on internal company courses and
specialisations, while NK (non-qualified) – no education, generally
uncompleted primary school (less than 8 YET).
The statistical analysis was limited to the presentation of
percentages and the calculation of injury rates expressed as rates
per 100 worker-years of exposure.
Results
During the observed 10-year period, there were a total of 5850
injuries in all nine mines. The accidents resulting in injuries
happened both on the surface and in the underground productive
units. There was no noticeable pattern in injuries over the years
and the annual number of injuries was fairly constant.
The degree of the injuries – the severity
The results of the data analysis on the severity of injuries were
as expected. The majority of the injuries were light injuries (5326
or 91.04%), followed by heavy injuries (508 or 8.68%), whereas
there were only 16 fatal injuries (only 0.27%). The distribution of
the degree of injuries over the observed period is given in Table 1.
The age of injured workers
Preliminary analysis of the raw data (Table 2) threw up a
surprising result. The highest rate was recorded not amongst the
youngest workers, as expected13,14 (28.99% compared to 36.05% in
the 31–40 age span). However, the analysis of the raw data did not
consider the number of workers in each group and an additional
analysis was performed using the rate of injuries per 100 worker-
years (Table 2.1). The calculated rates confirmed the first assump-
tion that the youngest workers (with the least experience) have the
highest injury rate and that it decreases with increasing age.
The location of the injury
The data on the location of the injury are given in Table 3.
Time of injury – working shift
As far as the time of injury is concerned, the results of the
analysis were also unexpected. The expected result was that the
majority of injuries occurred during the third (night) shift.
However, the majority of injuries occurred during the morning
shift. The data are presented in Table 4.

Table 1
Injury distribution according to the degree.
P
Degreea 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %

F 3 2 2 2 3 2 1 0 1 0 16 0.27
H 51 38 51 47 40 50 52 59 55 65 508 8.68
L 479 502 525 533 608 551 498 499 613 518 5326 91.04
P
533 542 578 582 651 603 551 558 669 583 5850 100.00
% 9.11 9.26 9.88 9.95 11.13 10.31 9.42 9.54 11.44 9.97 100.00
a
F, fatal; H, heavy (MSHA NFDL equivalent); L, light (MSHA NDL equivalent).

Table 2
Injury distribution according to the age of the workers.
P
Age (years) 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %

51–60 34 51 61 61 47 35 30 30 30 34 413 7.06

41–50 148 124 179 123 188 143 155 163 217 192 1632 27.90
31–40 187 187 183 208 222 234 196 233 249 210 2109 36.05
20–30 164 180 155 190 194 191 170 132 173 147 1696 28.99
P
533 542 578 582 651 603 551 558 669 583 5850
% 9.11 9.26 9.88 9.95 11.13 10.31 9.42 9.54 11.44 9.97 100.00
 S. Stojadinović et al. / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 43 (2012) 2001–2005 2003

Table 2.1 JP PEU has adopted the QMS system (quality management
Injury rates per 100 worker-years according to the age of the workers.
system), but despite that, the injury report style and form are
Age (years) ANW Injuries RI/100WY still not unified for all mines. So, in order to be comparable, the
51–60 708 413 5.83 data from the mines had to be processed, which consumed a
41–50 1571 1632 10.39 significant amount of time and opened the possibility for errors.
31–40 1233 2109 17.11 An additional problem is that, despite the fact that safety service
21–30 573 1696 29.60 keeps records on all injuries, these records are not accompanied
P
4084 5850
by the data on the days lost after the injury. These data can be
ANW, average number of workers; RI/100WY, rate of injuries per 100 worker-years. found in the accounting department of the mine, which further
complicates any analysis. What makes the situation even more
Qualification structure – educational background complex is the fact that a mine has no feedback on the level of
working ability of the injured workers from the medical service
The analysis of the raw data showed that injury percentage is the after the treatment. This feedback is present only if the injury
lowest amongst the highly educated workers (VSS – 0.36% in Table 5) resulted in a disability, decreasing a miner’s ability to work. If,
and that the largest number of injuries are amongst the qualified (KV) for example, a worker suffered an injury that resulted in a 40%
and non-qualified (NK) workers (37.08% and 39.06%, respectively). hearing loss in one ear, the mine would not have any data on his
This result could lead to erroneous conclusions, since the number of condition after the medical treatment. The worker would be able
workers in each qualification group (i.e., the size of the group) was to work but his hearing disability could cause yet another
not considered. That is why once again the rates of injuries per 100 accident.
worker-years were calculated and are given in Table 5.1.
The degree of the injuries – the severity
Discussion
The results presented here most probably do not reflect the real
It must be pointed out that a problem was encountered condition in the mines. The number of injuries is probably higher,
regarding the monitoring, recording and processing of the data but, fortunately, they are mostly light injuries. A number of light
on injuries in the mines and at the level of the JP PEU Resavica. injuries, such as minor cuts and contusions (mostly finger injuries

Table 3
Injury distribution according to the injured body part.
P
Body part 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %

Head 46 50 49 52 51 61 44 43 55 63 514 8.79

Eye, ear or face 27 20 25 31 52 37 26 42 38 33 331 5.66
Internal organs 7 0 11 0 0 1 5 1 1 4 30 0.51
Poisoning 0 0 0 1 2 0 5 0 0 0 8 0.14
Upper limb 194 195 200 195 212 200 197 208 258 215 2074 35.45
Lower limb 184 190 213 216 217 199 175 178 225 200 1997 34.14
Chest, neck, back 22 27 37 32 47 57 37 32 34 15 340 5.81
Other 53 60 43 55 70 48 62 54 58 53 556 9.50
P
533 542 578 582 651 603 551 558 669 583 5850 100.00
% 9.11 9.26 9.88 9.95 11.13 10.31 9.42 9.54 11.44 9.97 100.00

Table 4
Injury distribution according to the working shift.
P
Working shifta 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %

III shift 121 128 139 133 140 134 117 127 156 142 1337 22.85
II shift 175 178 179 179 229 212 175 177 213 190 1907 32.60
I shift 237 236 260 270 282 257 259 254 300 251 2606 44.55
P
533 542 578 582 651 603 551 558 669 583 5850 100.00
% 9.11 9.26 9.88 9.95 11.13 10.31 9.42 9.54 11.44 9.97 100
a
I (07–15 h), II (15–23 h), III (23–07 h).

Table 5
Injury distribution according to the qualification structure.
P
Qualificationa 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 %

VSS 0 1 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 21 0.36
SSS 14 13 10 8 18 16 12 12 14 5 122 2.09
VKV 7 9 9 2 19 7 22 12 11 9 107 1.83
KV 211 199 208 240 232 215 197 212 234 221 2169 37.08
PK 108 83 95 101 131 114 113 110 164 127 1146 19.59
NK 193 237 253 229 249 248 204 210 244 218 2285 39.06
P
533 542 578 582 651 603 551 558 669 583 5850 100.00
% 9.11 9.26 9.88 9.95 11.13 10.31 9.42 9.54 11.44 9.97 100
a
VSS, higher education (16+ Years of Education in Total); SSS, secondary education (12 YET); VKV, highly qualified (11 YET); KV, qualified (8–11 YET); PKV, semi-qualified
(up to 8 YET); NK, non-qualified (no or up to 4 YET).
2004 S. Stojadinović et al. / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 43 (2012) 2001–2005
Table 5.1
Injury rates per 100 worker-years according to the qualification structure.
Qualificationa ANW Injuries RI/100WY
VSS 220 21 0.95
SSS 747 122 1.63
VKV 61 107 17.69
KV 1359 2169 15.97
PK 344 1146 33.36
NK 1355 2285 16.86
P
4084 5850
a Qualification structure – educational background
VSS, higher education (16+ Years of Education in Total); SSS, secondary
education (12 YET); VKV, highly qualified (11 YET); KV, qualified (8–11 YET); PKV,
semi-qualified (up to 8 YET); NK, non-qualified (no or up to 4 YET); ANW, average
number of workers; RI/100WY, rate of injuries per 100 worker-year.
and amongst the youngest workers), are never reported to the
safety service. These injuries, if reported, would change the
percentages in the injury distribution, resulting in a lower share of
fatal and heavy injuries in the overall sum.
The age of injured workers
As expected, the youngest workers had the highest injury rate
per 100 worker-years. This rate is probably even higher, since
younger workers rarely report minor, light injuries, such as cuts,
minor contusions, bruises, and foreign objects in the eye to the
safety service.
The location of the injury
As expected, the extremities have the highest injury percentage.
The injuries of the upper limbs are mainly caused by contact with
the machinery, especially belt and chain conveyors. The analysed
reports do not specify the part of the injured upper limb, but the
assumption is that it is the hand and the fingers. Lower limb
injuries mainly occur as a result of stepping or kneeling on an
object, stepping into the cavities or contact with the machinery,
especially stepping into the chain conveyor. As in the case of upper
limb injuries, the reports do not specify the part of the limb injured,
but the logical assumption is that it is the toes, foot, ankle or knee.
Head injuries are mostly the result of falling objects (coal from the
roof). The injuries of internal organs must be mentioned because of
their severity. Those injuries mainly occur as a result of the roof
caving and the workers being buried under a pile of coal. The other
cause is a fall from an elevation. In both cases, the internal organ
injuries are combined with fractures, contusions and other types of
injuries. The most common cause of back injury in mines is lifting
of the heavy weight, such as parts of the mine support. The
analysed reports give joint data for the eye, ear and face injuries,
but it is interesting to monitor only the eye injuries. From these
reports, it is impossible to say how many eye injuries resulted in
the loss of sight (treated as disability) and how many were caused
by foreign objects (light injury).
It must be noticed that this classification is not complete. Efforts
should be made to include more categories, especially for the limb,
eye and ear injuries.
Time of injury – working shift
According to the human biological clock, nighttime is the time
for rest. Hence, the loss of attention and concentration, fatigue,
somnolence and similar conditions are normal occurrences during
the night shifts. Therefore, it was surprising to find that the
majority of injuries occurred in the first (morning) shift. The first
shift has the largest number of workers, since all personnel are
present (management, control, technical staff, etc.). However,
additional workers are primarily engaged in administrative, office
jobs on the surface and cannot be an explanation for the high injury
percentage in the morning shift. The reason for this distribution of
injury percentages is the work organisation in mines. The first,
morning shift has the highest frequency of works and mining
operations. Additionally, all the servicing and current maintenance
are performed during the first shift, enabling the second and the
third shift to operate without delays and setbacks.
Despite the common opinion that higher educated personnel
would be more aware of the situation and recognise the potential
danger, a conclusion can be drawn, supported by the analysis and
injury rates calculation that the injuries are random occurrences,
independent of educational background. The distribution of the
number of injuries given in Table 5 is the result of the number of
workers and their engagement in specific mining operations. The
mining engineer, in normal conditions, will not handle the
segments of roof support and be exposed to the risk of roof
caving, whilst the non-qualified worker is normally exposed to
such risks.
Conclusion
Despite the indications that correlation between some variables
and the number of injuries exists, the overall conclusion is that the
injuries are random and unpredictable events. High injury
percentages shown in the tables are the consequence of work
organisation and the age or qualification structure of the personnel
and, of course, the consequence of probability (the higher the
number of workers, the higher the probability of injury). The high
number of limb injuries is the consequence of a high level of
manual labour. Since efforts are being made to mechanise the
mining operations in some mines, future studies will show the
influence of mechanisation on the number of limb injuries.
However, the study, even in this early stage, showed that some
things can be done to increase safety at work and lower the
number of injuries. For example, a longer training period for the
new workers or a simple ‘warning campaign’ amongst the workers
could increase the awareness and prevent some accidents. Since
most injuries occur during the morning shift, it could be helpful to
intensify safety control and reorganise mining works to avoid
overlapping and unnecessary crowding. Regarding the fact that the
basic cause of the majority of injures is the carelessness of the
workers, efforts to additionally secure the spots, such as cross
sections of the coal haulage and personnel passages, will decrease
the probability of contact with the belt or chain conveyors and,
hence, reduce the probability of the injury.
The problems in injury monitoring and reporting indicate the
need for the QMS application training on all levels, from the
management to the foremen underground. Apart from the QMS
training, it is necessary to design and create a new injury
monitoring and data processing system. The core of the system
should be a centralised database which would collect and process
all data on the injury, from the moment of injury to the moment
the worker returns to work.
Conflict of interest
The authors disclose no conflict of interest of any kind.
Funding
This study is not financed by any institution and is only an
academic research, motivated only by scientific curiosity.
 S. Stojadinović et al. / Injury, Int. J. Care Injured 43 (2012) 2001–2005
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the management of JP PEU for granting
access to the data and their help and especially to Dr. Jovo
Miljanovic from JP PEU, for his contribution in data acquisition.
References
1. The Serbian Orthodox Church, Serbian rulers, Stefan Uros I of Serbia 1243–1276
http://www.spcoluzern.ch/index.php?pg=1999&lang=en [accessed February
23, 2011].
2. The Serbian Orthodox Church, Serbian rulers, Despot Stefan Lazarevic 1374–
1427 http://www.spcoluzern.ch/index.php?pg=2006&lang=en [accessed Feb-
ruary 23, 2011].
3. Group of authors. In: Janicijevic J, editor. Cultural Treasury of Serbia. Belgrade,
Idea; 2005 [in Serbian, original title Kulturna Riznica Srbije].
4. Bajpayee TS, Rehak TR, Mowrey GL, Ingram DK. Blasting injuries in surface
mining with emphasis on flyrock and blast area security. Journal of Safety
Research 2004;35:47–57.
5. Poplin GS, Miller HB, Ranger-Moore J, Bofinger CM, Kurzius-Spencer M, Harris
RB, et al. International evaluation of injury rates in coal mining: a comparison of
2005
risk and compliance-based regulatory approaches. Safety Science 2008;
46:1196–204.
6. Komljenovic D, Groves WA, Kecojevic VJ. Injuries in U.S. mining operations – a
preliminary risk analysis. Safety Science 2008;46:792–801.
7. Kecojevic V, Komljenovic D, Groves W, Radomsky M. An analysis of equipment-
related fatal accidents in U.S. mining operations: 1995–2005. Safety Science
2007;45:864–74.
8. Grayson RL, Kinilakodi H, Kecojevic V. Pilot sample risk analysis for under-
ground coal mine fires and explosions using MSHA citation data. Safety Science
2009;47:1371–8.
9. Trybus M, Tusinski M, Guzik P. Alcohol-related hand injuries. Injury Interna-
tional Journal of the Care of the Injured 2005;36(1237):1240.
10. US MSHA Informational Report 1341. Injury Experience in Coal Mining. Denver,
Colorado; 2008.
11. Hull BP, Leigh J, Driscoll TR, Mandryk J. Factors associated with occupational
injury severity in the New South Wales underground coal mining industry.
Safety Science 1996;21:191–204.
12. Roudsari BS, Ghodsi M. Occupational injuries in Tehran. Injury International
Journal of the Care of the Injured 2005;36(33):39.
13. Margolis KA. Underground coal mining injury: a look at how age and experience
relate to days lost from work following an injury. Safety Science 2010;48:417–
21.
14. Hunting KL, Weeks JL. Transport injuries in small coal mines: an exploratory
analysis. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1993;23:391–406.