Developing Large-Scale Research in Response to an Oil Spill Disaster: a Case Study

Research conducted in the wake of a disaster can provide information to help mitigate health consequences, support future recovery efforts, and improve resilience. However, a number of barriers have prevented time-sensitive research responses following previous disasters. Furthermore, large-scale disasters present their own special challenges due to the number of people exposed to disaster conditions, the number of groups engaged in disaster response, and the logistical challenges of rapidly planning and implementing a large study. In this case study, we illustrate the challenges in planning and conducting a large-scale post-disaster research study by drawing on our experience in establishing the Gulf Long-term Follow-up (GuLF) Study following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster. We describe considerations in identifying at-risk populations and appropriate comparison groups, garnering support for the study from different stakeholders, obtaining timely scientific and ethics review, measuring and characterizing complex exposures, and addressing evolving community health concerns and unmet medical needs. We also describe the NIH Disaster Research Response (DR2) Program, which provides a suite of resources, including data collection tools, research protocols, institutional review board guidance, and training materials to enable the development and implementation of time-critical studies following disasters and public health emergencies. In describing our experiences related to the GuLF Study and the ongoing efforts through the NIH DR2 Program, we aim to help improve the timeliness, quality, and value of future disaster-related data collection and research studies.

The Gulf Long-Term Follow-Up Study (GuLF STUDY): Biospecimen collection at enrollment

The 2010 Deepwater Horizon (DWH) explosion in the Gulf of Mexico led to the largest ever marine oil spill by volume. The GuLF STUDY is investigating possible adverse human health effects associated with oil spill activities. One objective of the study was to utilize biological specimens from study participants to examine spill-related adverse health effects. This study describes the methods for collecting, processing, shipping, and storing specimens during the enrollment phase of the study. GuLF STUDY participants living in Gulf States (Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and eastern Texas) were eligible to complete a home visit at enrollment, one to three years after the DWH explosion. During this visit, blood, urine, toenail and hair clippings, and house dust samples were collected. Specimens were shipped overnight to a central processing laboratory in containers with cold and ambient temperature compartments. Most blood and urine specimens were then aliquoted and stored in liquid nitrogen vapor or at -80°C, with some samples stored at -20°C. A total of 11,193 participants completed a home visit, and over 99% provided at least one biospecimen. Most participants provided blood (93%), urine (99%), and toenail clippings (89%), and 40% provided hair. Nearly all participants (95%) provided house-dust samples. Most samples were received by the laboratory one (58%) or two (25%) days after collection. These biospecimens enable investigation of a range of biomarkers of spill-related adverse health effects, and possibly some biomarkers of spill-related exposures. The biospecimen collection, handling, and storage protocols were designed to maximize current and future scientific value within logistical and budgetary constraints and might serve as a template for future studies conducted in similar time-critical and geographically dispersed settings.