Evidence-based support for the all-hazards approach to emergency preparedness

Disaster preparedness for people with kidney disease and kidney healthcare providers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Man-made and natural disasters become more frequent and provoke significant morbidity and mortality, particularly among vulnerable people such as patients with underlying kidney diseases. This review summarizes strategies to minimize the risks associated with mass disasters among kidney healthcare providers and patients affected by kidney disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Considering patients, in advance displacement or evacuation are the only options to avoid harmful consequences of predictable disasters such as hurricanes. Following unpredictable catastrophes, one can only rely upon educational initiatives for disaster risk mitigation. Preparatory initiatives before disasters such as training courses should target minimizing hazards in order to decrease morbidity and mortality by effective interventions during and early after disasters. Retrospective evaluation of previous interventions is essential to identify adverse consequences of disaster-related health risks and to assess the efficacy of the medical response. However, preparations and subsequent responses are always open for ameliorations, even in well developed countries that are aware of disaster risks, and even after predictable disasters.

SUMMARY

Adverse consequences of disasters in patients with kidney diseases and kidney healthcare providers can be mitigated by predisaster preparedness and by applying action plans and pragmatic interventions during and after disasters. Preparing clear, practical and concise recommendations and algorithms in various languages is mandatory.

How to improve smart emergency preparedness for natural disasters? ---- Evidence from the experience of ten pilot provinces in China for smart emergency

The natural disasters faced by modern urban systems are complex, with multiple disaster-causing factors coexisting and secondary disasters occurring concurrently. With emergency management moving towards smart, natural disaster response has shifted from emergency-centered response to pre-disaster prevention. How to improve the government's natural disaster emergency preparedness has become an important issue that needs to be addressed. Based on the TOE (Technology-Organization-Environment) framework, the fsQCA method was used to explore the improvement path of emergency preparedness capacity of 10 pilot units in China to deal with natural disasters in 2020. Analyze the group effects and interrelationships of technology level, simultaneous supporting facilities, organizational construction, financial investment, external pressure, and social repercussions. The results show that: there exist four conditional groupings of high emergency preparedness in two modes. Two modes are organization-environment dual-drive and technology-organization-environment triple-drive, which have multiple concurrencies and follow the principle of consistent results. There are substitution effects in the conditional groupings of high emergency preparedness. There are causal asymmetries in the conditional groupings of high emergency preparedness and non-high emergency preparedness. This study aims to explore the smart emergency preparedness of ten pilot and to provide ideas for the overall development of "smart emergency response" and the improvement of emergency preparedness for natural disasters.

A Call to Action: Why Anesthesiologists Must Train, Prepare, and Be at the Forefront of Disaster Response for Mass Casualty Incidents

Disasters, both natural and man-made, continue to increase. In Spring 2023, a 3-hour workshop on mass casualty incidents was conducted at the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia-American Academy of Pediatrics Annual conference. The workshop used multiple instructional strategies to maximize knowledge transfer and learner engagement including minididactic sessions, problem-based learning discussions in 3 tabletop exercises, and 2 30-minute disaster scenarios with actors in a simulated hospital environment. Three themes became evident: (1) disasters will continue to impact hospitals and preparation is imperative, (2) anesthesiologists are extensively and comprehensively trained and their value is often underestimated as mass casualty incident responders, and (3) a need exists for longitudinal disaster preparedness education and training over the course of a career. In this special article, we have sought to further define the problem and evidence, the capacity of anesthesiologists as leaders in disaster preparedness, and the rationale for preparation with current best practices to guide how best to move forward.

PANDEM-Source, a tool to collect or generate surveillance indicators for pandemic management: a use case with COVID-19 data

Introduction

PANDEM-Source (PS) is a tool to collect and integrate openly available public health-related data from heterogeneous data sources to support the surveillance of infectious diseases for pandemic management. The tool may also be used for pandemic preparedness by generating surveillance data for training purposes. It was developed as part of the EU-funded Horizon 2020 PANDEM-2 project during the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of close collaboration in a consortium of 19 partners, including six European public health agencies, one hospital, and three first responder organizations. This manuscript describes PS's features and design to disseminate its characteristics and capabilities to strengthen pandemic preparedness and response.

Methods

A requirement-gathering process with EU pandemic managers in the consortium was performed to identify and prioritize a list of variables and indicators useful for surveillance and pandemic management. Using the COVID-19 pandemic as a use case, we developed PS with the purpose of feeding all necessary data to be displayed in the PANDEM-2 dashboard.

Results

PS routinely monitors, collects, and standardizes data from open or restricted heterogeneous data sources (users can upload their own data). It supports indicators and health resources related data from traditional data sources reported by national and international agencies, and indicators from non-traditional data sources such as those captured in social and mass media, participatory surveillance, and seroprevalence studies. The tool can also calculate indicators and be used to produce data for training purposes by generating synthetic data from a minimal set of indicators to simulate pandemic scenarios. PS is currently set up for COVID-19 surveillance at the European level but can be adapted to other diseases or threats and regions.

Conclusion

With the lessons learnt during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to keep building capacity to monitor potential threats and develop tools that can facilitate training in all the necessary aspects to manage future pandemics. PS is open source and its design provides flexibility to collect heterogeneous data from open data sources or to upload end users's own data and customize surveillance indicators. PS is easily adaptable to future threats or different training scenarios. All these features make PS a unique and valuable tool for pandemic management.

Disasters and kidney care: pitfalls and solutions

Patients with kidney disease, especially those with kidney failure, are particularly susceptible to the adverse effects of disasters because their survival depends on functional infrastructure, advanced technology, the availability of specific drugs and well-trained medical personnel. The risk of poor outcomes across the entire spectrum of patients with kidney diseases (acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease and kidney failure on dialysis or with a functioning transplant) increases as a result of disaster-related logistical challenges. Patients who are displaced face even more complex problems owing to additional threats that arise during travel and after reaching their new location. Overall, risks may be mitigated by pre-disaster preparedness and training. Emergency kidney disaster responses depend on the type and severity of the disaster and include medical and/or surgical treatment of injuries, treatment of mental health conditions, appropriate diet and logistical interventions. After a disaster, patients should be evaluated for problems that were not detected during the event, including those that may have developed as a result of the disaster. A retrospective review of the disaster response is vital to prevent future mistakes. Important ethical concerns include fair distribution of limited resources and limiting harm. Patients with kidney disease, their care-givers, health-care providers and authorities should be trained to respond to the medical and logistical problems that occur during disasters to improve outcomes.

Use of simulation models when developing and testing hospital evacuation plans: a tool for improving emergency preparedness

BACKGROUND

In recent decades, analyses of hospitals evacuations have generated valuable knowledge. Unfortunately, these evacuation case studies often lack crucial details and policies that would be helpful in evacuation preparedness. The aim of this study was to use a simulation model to illustrate how it can aid emergency planners in the development, testing, and revising of hospitals evacuation plans. This study includes evacuation exercises at two emergency hospitals in Region Stockholm, Sweden.

METHODS

A scientifically validated simulation system for "table top" exercises was used for interactive training of hospital medical staff, prehospital staff and collaborating agencies. All participants acted in their usual professionals' roles. The exercises were run in real-time and mirrored actual hospital resources with the aid of moveable magnetic symbols illustrating patients, staff and transport, presented on whiteboards. During the exercises, observers and independent instructors documented actions taken and post-exercise surveys were conducted to obtain reactions and compare results.

RESULTS

The simulation system allowed the emergency planner to test the whole evacuation process, making it possible to train and evaluate the important functions of management, coordination, and communication. Post-exercise surveys explored participants perception of the exercises. Analysis of open-ended questions included areas for improvement and resulted in five main categories: (1) management and liaison; (2) communication; (3) logistics; (4) medical care and patient prioritisation; and (5) resource utilisation.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has shown that "table top" exercises using a validated simulation system can serve to guide emergency planners when developing evacuation plans, procedures, and protocols as well in training of all medical staff. The system also served to train adaptive thinking, leadership, communication, and clarification of critical functions.

Organizational resilience in healthcare: a review and descriptive narrative synthesis of approaches to resilience measurement and assessment in empirical studies

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus pandemic has had a profound impact on organization and delivery of care. The challenges faced by healthcare organizations in dealing with the pandemic have intensified interest in the concept of resilience. While effort has gone into conceptualising resilience, there has been relatively little work on how to evaluate organizational resilience. This paper reports on an extensive review of approaches to resilience measurement and assessment in empirical healthcare studies, and examines their usefulness for researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers.

METHODS

Various databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL (EBSCO host), Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley), CDSR, Science Citation Index, and Social Science Citation Index) were searched from January 2000 to September 2021. We included quantitative, qualitative and modelling studies that focused on measuring or qualitatively assessing organizational resilience in a healthcare context. All studies were screened based on titles, abstracts and full text. For each approach, information on the format of measurement or assessment, method of data collection and analysis, and other relevant information were extracted. We classified the approaches to organizational resilience into five thematic areas of contrast: (1) type of shock; (2) stage of resilience; (3) included characteristics or indicators; (4) nature of output; and (5) purpose. The approaches were summarised narratively within these thematic areas.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. We identified a lack of consensus on how to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, what should be measured or assessed and when, and using what resilience characteristic and indicators. The measurement and assessment approaches varied in scope, format, content and purpose. Approaches varied in terms of whether they were prospective (resilience pre-shock) or retrospective (during or post-shock), and the extent to which they addressed a pre-defined and shock-specific set of characteristics and indicators.

CONCLUSION

A range of approaches with differing characteristics and indicators has been developed to evaluate organizational resilience in healthcare, and may be of value to researchers, policymakers and healthcare managers. The choice of an approach to use in practice should be determined by the type of shock, the purpose of the evaluation, the intended use of results, and the availability of data and resources.

Duty to Work During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Study of Perceptions of Health Care Providers in Jordan

Introduction

This study aimed to assess perceptions of duty to work among health care providers during the coronavirus disease 2019 response and to identify factors that may influence their perceptions.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional study conducted from April 1, 2020, to April 20, 2020, using an online survey distributed to health care providers in Jordan. Descriptive statistics were used, as well as chi-square test for independence to assess relationships between variables.

Results

A total of 302 questionnaires were included. Commitment to serve the community was the primary reason for coming to work (36%), followed by commitment to faith (29.6%). The major perceived barriers for coming to work were lack of appropriate personal protective equipment and appropriate training (62.6% and 53.5%, respectively). Males perceived higher work obligations than females in all potential barriers (P < .05), except for the lack of appropriate training. Nurses perceived higher work obligations than other health care providers despite the lack of appropriate training (χ² = 11.83, P = .005), lack of effective vaccine or treatment (χ² = 21.76, P < .001), or reported infection among coworkers (χ² = 10.18, P = .03).

Discussion

While the majority of health care providers perceive an obligation to work during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, specific conditions, mainly lack of protective gear and training, may significantly alter their perception of work obligation. Providing training and proper personal protective equipment are among the vital measures that could improve the work environment and work obligation during pandemic conditions.

Lernen und üben wir das Richtige?

Der Massenanfall von Verletzten (MANV) ist eine Ausnahmesituation für Rettungsdienst und andere Einsatzkräfte. Trotz niedriger Inzidenz müssen sich die Einsatzkräfte sowohl auf ärztlicher als auch auf nichtärztlicher Seite auf diesen Einsatzfall vorbereiten. In der vorliegenden Pilotstudie wurden anhand einer Fehlermöglichkeits- und -einflussanalyse (FMEA) die kritischen Einsatzfaktoren im MANV ermittelt und mit den Ausbildungscurricula verglichen. Die herangezogenen Curricula waren Notfallsanitäter:in, organisatorische:r Leiter:in, Konzept zur katastrophenmedizinischen Ausbildung im studentischen Unterricht an deutschen Hochschulen, Nationaler Kompetenz-basierter Lernzielkatalog Medizin (NKLM), Zusatz-Weiterbildung Notfallmedizin und Fortbildung zum:zur leitenden Notarzt:ärztin. Die Ergebnisse lassen vermuten, dass in der praktischen Ausbildung der MANV eine eher untergeordnete Rolle spielt. Weitere empirische Untersuchungen sind aus Sicht der Autoren notwendig.

Analysing the Launch of COVID-19 Vaccine National Rollouts: Nine Case Studies

In late 2020 and early 2021, with the eagerly anticipated regulatory approval of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, the urgent global effort to inoculate populations against this devastating virus was underway. These case studies examine the early stages of COVID-19 vaccine rollouts across nine regions from around the world (Brazil, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Nigeria, Taiwan, United Kingdom and United States). By evaluating and comparing different approaches used to immunize against a novel pathogen, it is possible to learn a great deal about which methods were successful, and in which areas strategies can be improved. This information is applicable to the ongoing global vaccination against this virus, as well as in the event of future pandemics. Research was conducted by following and tracking the progress of vaccine rollouts in the nine regions, using published clinical trials, government documents and news reports as sources of data. Results relate to the proportion of populations that had received at least one COVID-19 dose by 28 February 2021. Outcomes are discussed in the context of three key pillars integral to all immunization programs: procurement of vaccines, communication with the public and distribution of doses to individuals.

Developing Public Health Emergency Response Leaders in Incident Management: A Scoping Review of Educational Interventions

During emergency responses, public health leaders frequently serve in incident management roles that differ from their routine job functions. Leaders' familiarity with incident management principles and functions can influence response outcomes. Therefore, training and exercises in incident management are often required for public health leaders. To describe existing methods of incident management training and exercises in the literature, we queried 6 English language databases and found 786 relevant articles. Five themes emerged: (1) experiential learning as an established approach to foster engaging and interactive learning environments and optimize training design; (2) technology-aided decision support tools are increasingly common for crisis decision-making; (3) integration of leadership training in the education continuum is needed for developing public health response leaders; (4) equal emphasis on competency and character is needed for developing capable and adaptable leaders; and (5) consistent evaluation methodologies and metrics are needed to assess the effectiveness of educational interventions.These findings offer important strategic and practical considerations for improving the design and delivery of educational interventions to develop public health emergency response leaders. This review and ongoing real-world events could facilitate further exploration of current practices, emerging trends, and challenges for continuous improvements in developing public health emergency response leaders.

Israel's rapid rollout of vaccinations for COVID-19

As of the end of 2020, the State of Israel, with a population of 9.3 million, had administered more COVID-19 vaccine doses than all countries aside from China, the US, and the UK. Moreover, Israel had administered almost 11.0 doses per 100 population, while the next highest rates were 3.5 (in Bahrain) and 1.4 (in the United Kingdom). All other countries had administered less than 1 dose per 100 population.While Israel's rollout of COVID-19 vaccinations was not problem-free, its initial phase had clearly been rapid and effective. A large number of factors contributed to this early success, and they can be divided into three major groups.The first group of factors consists of long-standing characteristics of Israel which are extrinsic to health care. They include: Israel's small size (in terms of both area and population), a relatively young population, relatively warm weather in December 2020, a centralized national system of government, and well-developed infrastructure for implementing prompt responses to large-scale national emergencies.The second group of factors are also long-standing, but they are health-system specific. They include: the organizational, IT and logistical capacities of Israel's community-based health care providers, the availability of a cadre of well-trained, salaried, community-based nurses who are directly employed by those providers, a tradition of effective cooperation between government, health plans, hospitals, and emergency care providers - particularly during national emergencies; and support tools and decisionmaking frameworks to support vaccination campaigns.The third group consists of factors that are more recent and are specific to the COVID-19 vaccination effort. They include: the mobilization of special government funding for vaccine purchase and distribution, timely contracting for a large amount of vaccines relative to Israel's population, the use of simple, clear and easily implementable criteria for determining who had priority for receiving vaccines in the early phases of the distribution process, a creative technical response that addressed the demanding cold storage requirements of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, and well-tailored outreach efforts to encourage Israelis to sign up for vaccinations and then show up to get vaccinated.While many of these facilitating factors are not unique to Israel, part of what made the Israeli rollout successful was its combination of facilitating factors (as opposed to each factor being unique separately) and the synergies it created among them. Moreover, some high-income countries (including the US, the UK, and Canada) are lacking several of these facilitating factors, apparently contributing to the slower pace of the rollout in those countries.

Simulation exercises and after action reviews - analysis of outputs during 2016-2019 to strengthen global health emergency preparedness and response

Background

Under the International Health Regulations (2005) [IHR (2005)] Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, after action reviews (AAR) and simulation exercises (SimEx) are two critical components which measure the functionality of a country’s health emergency preparedness and response under a “real-life” event or simulated situation. The objective of this study was to describe the AAR and SimEx supported by the World Health Organization (WHO) globally in 2016–2019.

Methods

In 2016–2019, WHO supported 63 AAR and 117 SimEx, of which 42 (66.7%) AAR reports and 56 (47.9%) SimEx reports were available. We extracted key information from these reports and created two central databases for AAR and SimEx, respectively. We conducted descriptive analysis and linked the findings according to the 13 IHR (2005) core capacities.

Results

Among the 42 AAR and 56 SimEx available reports, AAR and SimEx were most commonly conducted in the WHO African Region (AAR: n = 32, 76.2%; SimEx: n = 32, 52.5%). The most common public health events reviewed or tested in AAR and SimEx, respectively, were epidemics and pandemics (AAR: n = 38, 90.5%; SimEx: n = 46, 82.1%). For AAR, 10 (76.9%) of the 13 IHR core capacities were reviewed at least once, with no AAR conducted for food safety, chemical events, and radiation emergencies, among the reports available. For SimEx, all 13 (100.0%) IHR capacities were tested at least once. For AAR, the most commonly reviewed IHR core capacities were health services provision (n = 41, 97.6%), risk communication (n = 39, 92.9%), national health emergency framework (n = 39, 92.9%), surveillance (n = 37, 88.1%) and laboratory (n = 35, 83.3%). For SimEx, the most commonly tested IHR core capacity were national health emergency framework (n = 56, 91.1%), followed by risk communication (n = 48, 85.7%), IHR coordination and national IHR focal point functions (n = 45, 80.4%), surveillance (n = 31, 55.4%), and health service provision (n = 29, 51.8%). For AAR, the median timeframe between the end of the event and AAR was 125 days (range = 25–399 days).

Conclusions

WHO has recently published guidance for the planning, execution, and follow-up of AAR and SimEx. Through the guidance and the simplified reporting format provided, we hope to see more countries conduct AAR and SimEx and standardization in their methodology, practice, reporting and follow-up.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s12992-020-00632-w.

Maintaining Preparedness to Severe Though Infrequent Threats-Can It Be Done?

Background: A mass casualty incident (MCI) caused by toxicological/chemical materials constitutes a potential though uncommon risk that may cause great devastation. Presentation of casualties exposed to such materials in hospitals, if not immediately identified, may cause secondary contamination resulting in dysfunction of the emergency department. The study examined the impact of a longitudinal evaluation process on the ongoing emergency preparedness of hospitals for toxicological MCIs, over a decade. Methods: Emergency preparedness for toxicological incidents of all Israeli hospitals were periodically evaluated, over ten years. The evaluation was based on a structured tool developed to encourage ongoing preparedness of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), equipment and infrastructure, knowledge of personnel, and training and exercises. The benchmarks were distributed to all hospitals, to be used as a foundation to build and improve emergency preparedness. Scores were compared within and between hospitals. Results: Overall mean scores of emergency preparedness increased over the five measurements from 88 to 95. A significant increase between T1 (first evaluation) and T5 (last evaluation) occurred in SOPs (p = 0.006), training and exercises (p = 0.003), and in the overall score (p = 0.004). No significant changes were found concerning equipment and infrastructure and knowledge; their scores were consistently very high throughout the decade. An interaction effect was found between the cycles of evaluation and the hospitals’ geographical location (F _(1,20) = 3.0, p = 0.056), proximity to other medical facilities (F _(1,20) = 10.0 p = 0.005), and type of area (Urban vs. Periphery) (F _(1,20) = 13.1, p = 0.002). At T5, all hospitals achieved similar high scores of emergency preparedness. Conclusions: Use of accessible benchmarks, which clearly delineate what needs to be continually implemented, facilitates an ongoing sustenance of effective levels of emergency preparedness. As this was demonstrated for a risk that does not frequently occur, it may be assumed that it is possible and practical to achieve and maintain emergency preparedness for other potential risks.

Types of Disasters

Disasters are increasing around the world. Children are greatly impacted by both natural disasters (forces of nature) and man-made (intentional, accidental) disasters. Their unique anatomical, physiological, behavioral, developmental, and psychological vulnerabilities must be considered when planning and preparing for disasters. The nurse or health care provider (HCP) must be able to rapidly identify acutely ill children during a disaster. Whether it is during a natural or man-made event, the nurse or HCP must intervene effectively to improve survival and outcomes. It is extremely vital to understand the medical management of these children during disasters, especially the use of appropriate medical countermeasures such as medications, antidotes, supplies, and equipment.

Emergency Preparedness in Ambulatory Surgery Centers and Office-Based Anesthesia Practices

Natural or manmade disasters, mass causality events, and other emergencies can disrupt healthcare delivery and change the demand for healthcare services. In order to protect patients, staff, and facilities it is essential that healthcare facilities be prepared for such emergency events. Ambulatory surgery centers (ASC) and Office Based Anesthesia (OBA) practices are unique healthcare settings that necessitate specific emergency planning since they typically do not have rapid response or code teams on site. In addition, they typically operate with fewer personnel and have staff members who often perform multiple functions. Previously there has been variability in the emergency preparedness amongst ASCs and OBA practices. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has recently identified three requirements for maintaining healthcare services during an emergency. These are 1) safeguarding human resources, 2) maintaining business operations, and 3) protecting physical resources. In 2016 CMS issued new rules establishing national emergency preparedness requirements for Medicare and Medicaid participating providers in the United States. In addition there are requirements specifically for ASCs and OBAs. The first step in emergency preparedness is performing a risk assessment for a practice using an “all-hazards” approach. In this approach, the practice attempts to identify all hazards that could potentially affect the practice as well as evaluating the likelihood of such hazards. This risk assessment is then incorporated into an emergency plan for the facility. In addition to reviewing specific components of an emergency plan for ASCs and OBAs, the need to test the plan and create a subsequent corrective action plan is reviewed. It is important that healthcare providers at all ambulatory surgery centers and office based anesthesia practices are aware of regulations for emergency preparedness and work to ensure that patients, staff and physical resources are protected during natural disasters and other emergencies.

Are we prepared? The development of performance indicators for public health emergency preparedness using a modified Delphi approach

BACKGROUND

Disasters and emergencies from infectious diseases, extreme weather and anthropogenic events are increasingly common. While risks vary for different communities, disaster and emergency preparedness is recognized as essential for all nation-states. Evidence to inform measurement of preparedness is lacking. The objective of this study was to identify and define a set of public health emergency preparedness (PHEP) indicators to advance performance measurement for local/regional public health agencies.

METHODS

A three-round modified Delphi technique was employed to develop indicators for PHEP. The study was conducted in Canada with a national panel of 33 experts and completed in 2018. A list of indicators was derived from the literature. Indicators were rated by importance and actionability until achieving consensus.

RESULTS

The scoping review resulted in 62 indicators being included for rating by the panel. Panel feedback provided refinements to indicators and suggestions for new indicators. In total, 76 indicators were proposed for rating across all three rounds; of these, 67 were considered to be important and actionable PHEP indicators.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed an indicator set of 67 PHEP indicators, aligned with a PHEP framework for resilience. The 67 indicators represent important and actionable dimensions of PHEP practice in Canada that can be used by local/regional public health agencies and validated in other jurisdictions to assess readiness and measure improvement in their critical role of protecting community health.

Defining and Operationalizing Disaster Preparedness in Hospitals: A Systematic Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Societies invest substantial amounts of resources on disaster preparedness of hospitals. However, the concept is not clearly defined nor operationalized in the international literature.

AIM

This review aims to systematically assess definitions and operationalizations of disaster preparedness in hospitals, and to develop an all-encompassing model, incorporating different perspectives on the subject.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in five databases: Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Disaster Information Management Research Centre, and SafetyLit. Peer-reviewed articles containing definitions and operationalizations of disaster preparedness in hospitals were included. Articles published in languages other than English, or without available full-text, were excluded, as were articles on prehospital care. The findings from literature were used to build a model for hospital disaster preparedness.

RESULTS

In the included publications, 13 unique definitions of disaster preparedness in hospitals and 22 different operationalizations of the concept were found. Although the definitions differed in emphasis and width, they also reflected similar elements. Based on an analysis of the operationalizations, nine different components could be identified that generally were not studied in relation to each other. Moreover, publications primarily focused on structure and process aspects of disaster preparedness. The aim of preparedness was described in seven articles.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This review points at an absence of consensus on the definition and operationalization of disaster preparedness in hospitals. By combining elements of definitions and components operationalized, disaster preparedness could be conceptualized in a more comprehensive and complete way than before. The model presented can guide future disaster preparedness activities and research.

Integrating Health System Preparedness and Community Resilience: Using the CMS Preparedness Rule as a Focusing Event

This commentary discusses the prospect and value of using the preparedness rule developed and implemented by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services as a focal point for better integrating health system preparedness into broader community resilience efforts, whether at the local or international level. Much attention has been given to the idea that community resilience requires extensive collaboration and coordination between actors across sectors, elements that are vital to effective emergency preparedness in health care as well. To facilitate improved fiscal sustainability, the federal government has since 2012 been encouraging healthcare coalitions to pursue nonprofit status. Building such organizations for the long term will require coalitions to become more proactive in involving organizations outside of the health sector. The preparedness rule has done much to encourage more dialogue between health system actors, and we argue that this momentum should be carried forward to generate a broader discussion of the importance of health preparedness to community resilience. The value of embedding preparedness planning into larger community resilience initiatives is discussed.

Assessing Hospital Disaster Readiness Over Time at the US Department of Veterans Affairs

Introduction

There have been numerous initiatives by government and private organizations to help hospitals become better prepared for major disasters and public health emergencies. This study reports on efforts by the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Veterans Health Administration, Office of Emergency Management’s (OEM) Comprehensive Emergency Management Program (CEMP) to assess the readiness of VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) across the nation.

Hypothesis/Problem

This study conducts descriptive analyses of preparedness assessments of VAMCs and examines change in hospital readiness over time.

Methods

To assess change, quantitative analyses of data from two phases of preparedness assessments (Phase I: 2008-2010; Phase II: 2011-2013) at 137 VAMCs were conducted using 61 unique capabilities assessed during the two phases. The initial five-point Likert-like scale used to rate each capability was collapsed into a dichotomous variable: “not-developed=0” versus “developed=1.” To describe changes in preparedness over time, four new categories were created from the Phase I and Phase II dichotomous variables: (1) rated developed in both phases; (2) rated not-developed in Phase I but rated developed in Phase II; (3) rated not-developed in both phases; and (4) rated developed in Phase I but rated not- developed in Phase II.

Results

From a total of 61 unique emergency preparedness capabilities, 33 items achieved the desired outcome – they were rated either “developed in both phases” or “became developed” in Phase II for at least 80% of VAMCs. For 14 items, 70%-80% of VAMCs achieved the desired outcome. The remaining 14 items were identified as “low-performing” capabilities, defined as less than 70% of VAMCs achieved the desired outcome.

Conclusion:

Measuring emergency management capabilities is a necessary first step to improving those capabilities. Furthermore, assessing hospital readiness over time and creating robust hospital readiness assessment tools can help hospitals make informed decisions regarding allocation of resources to ensure patient safety, provide timely access to high-quality patient care, and identify best practices in emergency management during and after disasters. Moreover, with some minor modifications, this comprehensive, all-hazards-based, hospital preparedness assessment tool could be adapted for use beyond the VA.

Der-MartirosianC, RadcliffTA, GableAR, RiopelleD, HagigiFA, BrewsterP, DobalianA. Assessing hospital disaster readiness over time at the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Prehsop Disaster Med. 2017;32(1):46–57.

Developing Valid Measures of Emergency Management Capabilities within US Department of Veterans Affairs Hospitals

Introduction Hospitals play a critical role in providing health care in the aftermath of disasters and emergencies. Nonetheless, while multiple tools exist to assess hospital disaster preparedness, existing instruments have not been tested adequately for validity. Hypothesis/Problem This study reports on the development of a preparedness assessment tool for hospitals that are part of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA; Washington, DC USA).

METHODS

The authors evaluated hospital preparedness in six "Mission Areas" (MAs: Program Management; Incident Management; Safety and Security; Resiliency and Continuity; Medical Surge; and Support to External Requirements), each composed of various observable hospital preparedness capabilities, among 140 VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). This paper reports on two successive assessments (Phase I and Phase II) to assess the MAs' construct validity, or the degree to which component capabilities relate to one another to represent the associated domain successfully. This report describes a two-stage confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of candidate items for a comprehensive survey implemented to assess emergency preparedness in a hospital setting.

RESULTS

The individual CFAs by MA received acceptable fit statistics with some exceptions. Some individual items did not have adequate factor loadings within their hypothesized factor (or MA) and were dropped from the analyses in order to obtain acceptable fit statistics. The Phase II modified tool was better able to assess the pre-determined MAs. For each MA, except for Resiliency and Continuity (MA 4), the CFA confirmed one latent variable. In Phase I, two sub-scales (seven and nine items in each respective sub-scale) and in Phase II, three sub-scales (eight, four, and eight items in each respective sub-scale) were confirmed for MA 4. The MA 4 capabilities comprise multiple sub-domains, and future assessment protocols should consider re-classifying MA 4 into three distinct MAs.

CONCLUSION

The assessments provide a comprehensive and consistent, but flexible, approach for ascertaining health system preparedness. This approach can provide an organization with a clear understanding of areas for improvement and could be adapted into a standard for hospital readiness. Dobalian A , Stein JA , Radcliff TA , Riopelle D , Brewster P , Hagigi F , Der-Martirosian C . Developing valid measures of emergency management capabilities within US Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(5):475-484.

Promoting public health legal preparedness for emergencies: review of current trends and their relevance in light of the Ebola crisis

BACKGROUND

Public health legal preparedness (PHLP) for emergencies is a core component of the health system response. However, the implementation of health legal preparedness differs between low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and developed countries.

OBJECTIVE

This paper examines recent trends regarding public health legal preparedness for emergencies and discusses its role in the recent Ebola outbreak.

DESIGN

A rigorous literature review was conducted using eight electronic databases as well as Google Scholar. The results encompassed peer-reviewed English articles, reports, theses, and position papers dating from 2011 to 2014. Earlier articles concerning regulatory actions were also examined.

RESULTS

The importance of PHLP has grown during the past decade and focuses mainly on infection-disease scenarios. Amid LMICs, it mostly refers to application of international regulations, whereas in developed states, it focuses on independent legislation and creation of conditions optimal to promoting an effective emergency management. Among developed countries, the United States' utilisation of health legal preparedness is the most advanced, including the creation of a model comprising four elements: law, competencies, information, and coordination. Only limited research has been conducted in this field to date. Nevertheless, in both developed and developing states, studies that focused on regulations and laws activated in health systems during emergencies, identified inconsistency and incoherence. The Ebola outbreak plaguing West Africa since 2014 has global implications, challenges and paralleling results, that were identified in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

The review has shown the need to broaden international regulations, to deepen reciprocity between countries, and to consider LMICs health capacities, in order to strengthen the national health security. Adopting elements of the health legal preparedness model is recommended.

Measuring healthcare preparedness: an all-hazards approach

In a paper appearing in this issue, Adini, et al. describe a struggle familiar to many emergency planners-the challenge of planning for all scenarios. The authors contend that all-hazards, or capabilities-based planning, in which a set of core capabilities applicable to numerous types of events is developed, is a more efficient way to achieve general health care system emergency preparedness than scenario-based planning. Essentially, the core of what is necessary to plan for and respond to one kind of disaster (e.g. a biologic event) is also necessary for planning and responding to other types of disasters, allowing for improvements in planning and maximizing efficiencies. While Adini, et al. have advanced the science of health care emergency preparedness through their consideration of 490 measures to assess preparedness, a shorter set of validated preparedness measures would support the dual goals of accountability and improved outcomes and could provide the basis for determining which actions in the name of preparedness really matter.