Improved trauma system multicasualty incident response: comparison of two train crash disasters

Concept review of regionalized systems of acute care: Is regionalization the next frontier in sepsis care?

Regionalization has become a buzzword in US health care policy. Regionalization, however, has varied meanings, and definitions have lacked contextual information important to understanding its role in improving care. This concept review is a comprehensive primer and summation of 8 common core components of the national models of regionalization informed by text-based analysis of the writing of involved organizations (professional, regulatory, and research) guided by semistructured interviews with organizational leaders. Further, this generalized model of regionalized care is applied to sepsis care, a novel discussion, drawing on existing small-scale applications. This discussion highlights the fit of regionalization principles to the sepsis care model and the actualized and perceived potential benefits. The principal aim of this concept review is to outline regionalization in the United States and provide a roadmap and novel discussion of regionalized care integration for sepsis care.

Kuala Lumpur train collision during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Two city trains collided in an underground tunnel on 24 May 2021 at the height of COVID-19 pandemic near the Petronas Towers, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, immediately after the evening rush hours. We aim to evaluate the management of this mass casualty incident highlighting the lessons learned to be used in preparedness for similar incidents that may occur in other major cities worldwide.

METHODS

Information regarding incident site and hospital management response were analysed. Data on demography, triaging, injuries and hospital management of patients were collected according to a designed protocol. Challenges, difficulties and their solutions were reported.

RESULTS

The train's emergency response team (ERT) has shut down train movements towards the incident site. Red zone (in the tunnel), yellow zone (the station platform) and green zone (outside the station entrance) were established. The fire and rescue team arrived and assisted the ERT in the red zone. Incident command system was established at the site. Medical base station was established at the yellow zone. Two hundred and fourteen passengers were in the trains. Sixty-four of them were injured. They had a median (range) ISS of 2 (1-43), and all were sent to Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL). Six (9.4%) patients were clinically triaged as red (critical), 19 (29.7%) as yellow (semi-critical) and 39 (60.9%) as green (non-critical). HKL's disaster plan was activated. All patients underwent temperature and epidemiology link assessment. Seven (10.9%) patients were admitted to the hospital (3 to the ICU, 3 to the ward and 1 to a private hospital as requested by the patient), while the rest 56 (87.5%) were discharged home. Six (9.4%) needed surgery. The COVID-19 tests were conducted on seven patients (10.9%) and were negative. There were no deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The mass casualty incident was handled properly because of a clear standard operating procedure, smooth coordination between multi-agencies and the hospitals, presence of a 'binary' system for 'COVID-risk' and 'non-COVID-risk' areas, and the modifications of the existing disaster plan. Preparedness for MCIs is essential during pandemics.

Attitudes Towards and Experience of the Use of Triage Tags in Major Incidents: A Mixed Method Study

Introduction

Disaster triage is the allocation of limited medical resources in order to optimize patient outcome. There are several studies showing the poor use of triage tagging, but there are few studies that have investigated the reasons behind this. The aim of this study was to explore ambulance personnel attitude towards, and experiences of, practicing triage tagging during day-to-day management of trauma patients, as well as in major incidents (MIs).

Methods

A mixed method design was used. The first part of the study was in the form of a web-survey of attitudes answered by ambulance personnel. The question explored was: Is it likely that systems that are not used in everyday practice will be used during MIs? Two identical web-based surveys were conducted, before and after implementing a new strategy for triage tagging. This strategy consisted of a time-limited triage routine where ambulance services assigned triage category and applied triage tags in day-to-day trauma incidents in order to improve field triage. The second part comprised three focus group interviews (FGIs) in order to provide a deeper insight into the attitudes towards, and experience of, the use of triage tags. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis.

Results

The overall finding was the need for daily routine when failure in practice. Analysis of the web-survey revealed three changes: ambulance personnel were more prone to use tags in minor accidents, the sort scoring system was considered to be more valuable, but it also was more time consuming after the intervention. In the analysis of FGIs, four categories emerged that describe the construction of the overall category: perceived usability, daily routine, documentation, and need for organizational strategies.

Conclusion

Triage is part of the foundation of ambulance skills, but even so, ambulance personnel seldom use this in routine practice. They fully understand the benefit of accurate triage decisions, and also that the use of a triage algorithm and color coded tags is intended to make it easier and more secure to perform triage. However, despite the knowledge and understanding of these benefits, sparse incidents and infrequent exercises lead to ambulance personnel’s uncertainty concerning the use of triage tagging during a MI and will therefore, most likely, avoid using them.

RådestadM, Lennquist MontánK, RüterA, CastrénM, SvenssonL, GrythD, FossumB. Attitudes towards and experience of the use of triage tags in major incidents: a mixed method study. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(4):376–385.

Evacuation of Intensive Care Units During Disaster: Learning From the Hurricane Sandy Experience

OBJECTIVE

Data on best practices for evacuating an intensive care unit (ICU) during a disaster are limited. The impact of Hurricane Sandy on New York City area hospitals provided a unique opportunity to learn from the experience of ICU providers about their preparedness, perspective, roles, and activities.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of nurses, respiratory therapists, and physicians who played direct roles during the Hurricane Sandy ICU evacuations.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight health care professionals from 4 evacuating hospitals completed surveys (35% ICU nurses, 21% respiratory therapists, 25% physicians-in-training, and 13% attending physicians). Only 21% had participated in an ICU evacuation drill in the past 2 years and 28% had prior training or real-life experience. Processes were inconsistent for patient prioritization, tracking, transport medications, and transport care. Respondents identified communication (43%) as the key barrier to effective evacuation. The equipment considered most helpful included flashlights (24%), transport sleds (21%), and oxygen tanks and respiratory therapy supplies (19%). An evacuation wish list included walkie-talkies/phones (26%), lighting/electricity (18%), flashlights (10%), and portable ventilators and suction (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

ICU providers who evacuated critically ill patients during Hurricane Sandy had little prior knowledge of evacuation processes or vertical evacuation experience. The weakest links in the patient evacuation process were communication and the availability of practical tools. Incorporating ICU providers into hospital evacuation planning and training, developing standard evacuation communication processes and tools, and collecting a uniform dataset among all evacuating hospitals could better inform critical care evacuation in the future.

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

BACKGROUND

Despite the high risk for patient harm during unanticipated ICU evacuations, critical care providers receive little to no training on how to perform safe and effective ICU evacuations. We reviewed the pertinent published literature and offer suggestions for the critical care provider regarding ICU evacuation. The suggestions in this article are important for all who are involved in pandemics or disasters with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.

METHODS

The Evacuation and Mobilization topic panel used the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) Guidelines Oversight Committee's methodology to develop seven key questions for which specific literature searches were 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.

RESULTS

Based on current best evidence, we provide 13 suggestions outlining a systematic approach to prepare for and execute an effective ICU evacuation during a disaster. Interhospital and intrahospital collaboration and functional ICU communication are critical for success. Pre-event planning and preparation are required for a no-notice evacuation. A Critical Care Team Leader must be designated within the Hospital Incident Command System. A three-stage ICU Evacuation Timeline, including (1) no immediate threat, (2) evacuation threat, and (3) evacuation implementation, should be used. Detailed suggestions on ICU evacuation, including regional planning, evacuation drills, patient transport preparation and equipment, patient prioritization and distribution for evacuation, patient information and tracking, and federal and international evacuation assistance systems, are also provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful ICU evacuation during a disaster requires active preparation, participation, communication, and leadership by critical care providers. Critical care providers have a professional obligation to become better educated, prepared, and engaged with the processes of ICU evacuation to provide a safe continuum of critical care during a disaster.

Implementation of a medical command and control team in Switzerland

In case of a major incident or disaster, the advance medical rescue command needs to manage several essential tasks simultaneously. These include the rapid deployment of ambulance, police, fire and evacuation services, and their coordinated activity, as well as triage and emergency medical care on site. The structure of such a medical rescue command is crucial for the successful outcome of medical evacuation at major incidents. However, little data has been published on the nature and structure of the command itself. This study presents a flexible approach to command structure, with two command heads: one emergency physician and one experienced paramedic. This approach is especially suitable for Switzerland, whose federal system allows for different structures in each canton. This article examines the development of these structures and their efficiency, adaptability and limitations with respect to major incident response in the French-speaking part of the country.

Scientific framework for research on disaster and mass casualty incident in Korea: building consensus using Delphi method

We aimed to determine the scientific framework for research on disaster and mass casualty incident (MCI) in Korea, especially Korean terminology, feasible definition, and epidemiologic indices. The two staged policy Delphi method was performed by instructors of National Disaster Life Support (NDLS®) with the constructed questionnaire containing items based on the literature review. The first-stage survey was conducted by 11 experts through two rounds of survey for making issue and option. The second-stage survey was conducted by 35 experts for making a generalized group based consensus. Experts were selected among instructors of National Disaster Life Support Course. Through two staged Delphi survey experts made consensus: 1) the Korean terminology "jaenan" with "disaster" and "dajung-sonsang-sago" with "MCI"; 2) the feasible definition of "disaster" as the events that have an effect on one or more municipal local government area (city-county-district) or results in ≥ 10 of death or ≥ 50 injured victims; 3) the feasible definition of MCI as the events that result in ≥ 6 casualties including death; 4) essential 31 epidemiologic indices. Experts could determine the scientific framework in Korea for research on disaster medicine, considering the distinct characteristics of Korea and current research trends.

Systematic review of strategies to manage and allocate scarce resources during mass casualty events

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Efficient management and allocation of scarce medical resources can improve outcomes for victims of mass casualty events. However, the effectiveness of specific strategies has never been systematically reviewed. We analyze published evidence on strategies to optimize the management and allocation of scarce resources across a wide range of mass casualty event contexts and study designs.

METHODS

Our literature search included MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Health, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, from 1990 through late 2011. We also searched the gray literature, using the New York Academy of Medicine's Grey Literature Report and key Web sites. We included both English- and foreign-language articles. We included studies that evaluated strategies used in actual mass casualty events or tested through drills, exercises, or computer simulations. We excluded studies that lacked a comparison group or did not report quantitative outcomes. Data extraction, quality assessment, and strength of evidence ratings were conducted by a single researcher and reviewed by a second; discrepancies were reconciled by the 2 reviewers. Because of heterogeneity in outcome measures, we qualitatively synthesized findings within categories of strategies.

RESULTS

From 5,716 potentially relevant citations, 74 studies met inclusion criteria. Strategies included reducing demand for health care services (18 studies), optimizing use of existing resources (50), augmenting existing resources (5), implementing crisis standards of care (5), and multiple categories (4). The evidence was sufficient to form conclusions on 2 strategies, although the strength of evidence was rated as low. First, as a strategy to reduce demand for health care services, points of dispensing can be used to efficiently distribute biological countermeasures after a bioterrorism attack or influenza pandemic, and their organization influences speed of distribution. Second, as a strategy to optimize use of existing resources, commonly used field triage systems do not perform consistently during actual mass casualty events. The number of high-quality studies addressing other strategies was insufficient to support conclusions about their effectiveness because of differences in study context, comparison groups, and outcome measures. Our literature search may have missed key resource management and allocation strategies because of their extreme heterogeneity. Interrater reliability was not assessed for quality assessments or strength of evidence ratings. Publication bias is likely, given the large number of studies reporting positive findings.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence base is inadequate to inform providers and policymakers about the most effective strategies for managing or allocating scarce resources during mass casualty events. Consensus on methodological standards that encompass a range of study designs is needed to guide future research and strengthen the evidence base. Evidentiary standards should be developed to promote consensus interpretations of the evidence supporting individual strategies.

The Fort Hood Massacre: Lessons learned from a high profile mass casualty

BACKGROUND

On November 5, 2009, an army psychiatrist at Fort Hood in Killeen, TX, allegedly opened fire at the largest US military base in the world, killing 13 and wounding 32.

METHODS

Data from debriefing sessions, news media, and area hospitals were reviewed.

RESULTS

Ten patients were initially transferred to the regional Level I trauma center. The remainder of the shooting victims were triaged to two other local regional hospitals. National news networks broadcasted the Level I trauma center's referral phone line which resulted in more than 1,300 calls. The resulting difficulties in communication led to the transfer of two victims (one critical) to a regional hospital without a trauma designation.

CONCLUSIONS

Triage at the scene was compromised by a lack of a secure environment, leading to undertriage of several patients. Overload of routine communication pathways compounded the problem, suggesting redundancy is crucial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic study, level V.

The development and implementation of a Hospital Emergency Response Team (HERT) for out-of-hospital surgical care

Over the past two decades, Los Angeles County has implemented a Hospital Emergency Response Team (HERT) to provide on-scene, advanced surgical care of injured patients as an element of the local Emergency Medical Services (EMS) system. Since 2008, the primary responsibility of the team has been to perform surgical procedures in the austere field setting when prolonged extrication is anticipated. Following the maxim of "life over limb," the team is equipped to provide rapid amputation of an entrapped extremity as well as other procedures and medical care, such as anxiolytics and advanced pain control. This report describes the development and implementation of a local EMS system HERT.