Facilitating hospital emergency preparedness: introduction of a model memorandum of understanding

Participation in emergency preparedness and response: a national survey of pharmacists and pharmacist extenders

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic highlights the critical role of pharmacists in pandemic response. To enhance pharmacist’s involvement in future emergency situations, there is a critical need to understand pharmacists’ knowledge, willingness and preparedness in response to various emergency situations.

Objective

This study aimed to describe pharmacists and pharmacist extenders on their participation in emergency response activities and training, preparedness and willingness to respond in emergency situations, and knowledge of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) and their pharmacy’s emergency preparedness plans.

Methods

A cross-sectional design with an online survey of pharmacist, pharmacy owner, and pharmacy technician members of the National Community Pharmacists Association was employed in the United States in July – August 2020. Descriptive statistics summarized participants’ level of actual participation and their willingness to participate in emergency situations and training and their knowledge of MOU and their pharmacy’s emergency plans. A non-response bias investigation was conducted by comparing the early and late responders.

Results

Of the 6,486 members, 255 completed the questionnaire (RR1 = 4.0%). With the confidence level of 95%, the margin of error was 6%. About 60% were independently owned and in urban areas. More than 80% and 64% of the participants have not volunteered in any emergency or participated in any emergency training program, respectively. Over 60% were very willing to assist with the distribution of medications and vaccine administration. Less than 10% had MOUs with health departments. More than 60% of respondents were not aware of what MOU is.

Conclusion

Despite limited involvement in actual emergency activities and training, pharmacists and pharmacist extenders exhibited a high level of willingness to participate in emergency training and assist in case of emergencies. This study recommends the development of programs aimed at increasing pharmacists’ and pharmacist extenders’ participation in emergency training and in future public health emergencies.

Physician Emergency Preparedness: A National Poll of Physicians

OBJECTIVE

To provide a more comprehensive view than previously available of US physician preparedness for public health emergencies, this study examined physicians' assessments of their preparedness, training, participation in institutional activities, information practices, and experiences with patient education. Four kinds of public health emergencies were considered: natural disasters, major airborne infections, major foodborne illness outbreaks, and chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosives (CBRNE) incidents.

METHODS

Between October 19, 2011, and January 11, 2012, researchers conducted a national poll among 1603 practicing physicians in a range of specialties in hospital and nonhospital settings.

RESULTS

More than one-half of physicians felt prepared to handle a natural disaster, a major outbreak of an airborne infection, or a major foodborne illness outbreak, whereas one-third (34%) felt prepared to handle a CBRNE incident. About one-half of physicians (55%) had participated in training or a conference related to emergencies in the past 2 years. Sizable fractions of physicians were unaware of emergency response tools in their care setting. For example, nearly one-half in hospitals (44%) did not know whether their care setting had an emergency response plan, and less than one-quarter had participated in a drill using such a plan in the past 2 years. Less than one-third (31%) of physicians had signed up to receive alerts in the case of future emergencies. One in 10 reported sharing emergency information with patients at least "sometimes."

CONCLUSIONS

Significant gaps remain in physician preparedness for public health emergencies, as well as in related training and participation in institutional activities. New efforts, with a focus on possible collaborations between public health institutions and health system leaders combined with effective use of online resources, are needed to bring more physicians on board and to develop relevant and useful key tools. New approaches, including those that rely on different types of care providers, may be needed to enhance patient education regarding emergency preparedness.

Triage: care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Pandemics and disasters can result in large numbers of critically ill or injured patients who may overwhelm available resources despite implementing surge-response strategies. If this occurs, critical care triage, which includes both prioritizing patients for care and rationing scarce resources, will be required. The suggestions in this chapter are important for all who are involved in large-scale pandemics or disasters with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.

METHODS

The Triage topic panel reviewed previous task force suggestions and the literature to identify 17 key questions for which specific literature searches were then conducted to identify studies upon which evidence-based recommendations could be made. No studies of sufficient quality were identified. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process. Suggestions from the previous task force that were not being updated were also included for validation by the expert panel.

RESULTS

The suggestions from the task force outline the key principles upon which critical care triage should be based as well as a path for the development of the plans, processes, and infrastructure required. This article provides 11 suggestions regarding the principles upon which critical care triage should be based and policies to guide critical care triage.

CONCLUSIONS

Ethical and efficient critical care triage is a complex process that requires significant planning and preparation. At present, the prognostic tools required to produce an effective decision support system (triage protocol) as well as the infrastructure, processes, legal protections, and training are largely lacking in most jurisdictions. Therefore, critical care triage should be a last resort after mass critical care surge strategies.

The use of memoranda of understanding in fostering inter-agency collaboration: A qualitative study of health services agencies serving vulnerable populations in Baltimore, USA

Introduction:

We examined whether mandated collaboration reflected in memoranda of understanding (MOUs) developed by health agencies to meet funder expectations is effective in fostering inter-agency collaboration.

Methods:

We conducted 22 semi-structured interviews from late 2010 to early 2012 in Baltimore, USA, with representatives of 17 HIV service agencies, three local health department units, and one agency that closed in 2008 (two interviews).

Results:

While there was no consensus, most respondents perceived MOUs negatively, mainly because the process of obtaining signed MOUs was time consuming; frontline staff was mostly unaware of MOUs, agencies did not necessarily work with agencies they signed MOUs with and MOUs were rarely evaluated after being signed. A few agencies reported that MOUs could keep agencies focused and set mutual expectations. The local health department acknowledged shortcomings in MOUs but emphasized that MOUs could help agencies plan for referring clients when their own capacity was full.

Conclusions:

Although many agencies acknowledged the importance of collaboration, most respondents found that MOUs lacked practical utility. Grant-makers should consult sub-grantees to develop alternative means of fostering collaboration that would be perceived as relevant by both parties.

Health systems' "surge capacity": state of the art and priorities for future research

CONTEXT

Over the past decade, a number of high-impact natural hazard events, together with the increased recognition of pandemic risks, have intensified interest in health systems' ability to prepare for, and cope with, "surges" (sudden large-scale escalations) in treatment needs. In this article, we identify key concepts and components associated with this emerging research theme. We consider the requirements for a standardized conceptual framework for future research capable of informing policy to reduce the morbidity and mortality impacts of such incidents. Here our objective is to appraise the consistency and utility of existing conceptualizations of health systems' surge capacity and their components, with a view to standardizing concepts and measurements to enable future research to generate a cumulative knowledge base for policy and practice.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature on concepts of health systems' surge capacity, with a narrative summary of key concepts relevant to public health.

FINDINGS

The academic literature on surge capacity demonstrates considerable variation in its conceptualization, terms, definitions, and applications. This, together with an absence of detailed and comparable data, has hampered efforts to develop standardized conceptual models, measurements, and metrics. Some degree of consensus is evident for the components of surge capacity, but more work is needed to integrate them. The overwhelming concentration in the United States complicates the generalizability of existing approaches and findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The concept of surge capacity is a useful addition to the study of health systems' disaster and/or pandemic planning, mitigation, and response, and it has far-reaching policy implications. Even though research in this area has grown quickly, it has yet to fulfill its potential to generate knowledge to inform policy. Work is needed to generate robust conceptual and analytical frameworks, along with innovations in data collection and methodological approaches that enhance health systems' readiness for, and response to, unpredictable high-consequence surges in demand.

Disaster mitigation: initial response

The objective of this review is to stimulate the reader's considerations for developing community disaster mitigation. Disaster mitigation begins long before impact and is defined as the actions taken by a community to eliminate or minimize the impact of a disaster. The assessment of vulnerabilities, the development of infrastructure, memoranda of understanding, and planning for a sustainable response and recovery are parts of the process. Empowering leadership and citizens with knowledge of available resources through the planning and development of a disaster response can strengthen a community's resilience, which can only add to the viability and quality of life enjoyed by the entire community.

Procedural pain and anxiety in paediatric patients in a Mexican emergency department

AIM

This article is a report of a study carried out to investigate the procedures that are likely to induce pain and anxiety in children in a Mexican emergency department.

BACKGROUND

In emergency rooms, children often experience unpredictable diagnostic and therapeutic procedural-related pain that can be associated with considerable anxiety.

DESIGN

A prospective, descriptive and cross sectional study was conducted to investigate the prevalence of procedures or situations that probably induced anxiety and/or pain in children in an emergency room.

METHODS

Procedural pain and anxiety were evaluated in children and adolescents (8-16 years) who were admitted to the emergency department of a paediatric hospital between February-September 2010. Children rated their pain and anxiety using a 100-mm visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

A total of 252 children with a mean age of 10·1 years were evaluated. Four-hundred fifty-nine procedures were completed, with an average of 1·82 events/child. Of these procedures, 369 (80·4%) were rated painful and 357 (77·8%) were rated stressful. The most frequently reported procedural pain or stressful episodes were peripheral catheterization, clinical examination and vascular puncture. Overall, 32·5% of the painful events were rated severe, 32·0% were rated moderate and 35·5% were rated slight. However, 30% of the stressful events were rated severe, 38·9% were rated moderate and 31·1% were rated slight. Peripheral catheterization was rated severe in 58 children (33·9%), moderate in 55 children (32·2%) and slight in 58 (33·9%) children.

CONCLUSION

This study provides data on common emergency department procedures that cause pain and anxiety in children and young adolescents. Healthcare providers must consider the best psychological and pharmacological interventions to reduce procedural anxiety and pain.