In Preparation or Response: Examining Health Care Coalitions Amid a Changing Economic and Political Landscape

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 698-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark E. Dornauer
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Community Health Centers ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Adverse Health Effects ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Political Landscape ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Operations Capabilities

ABSTRACTThe Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response within the US Department of Health and Human Services leads the nation in preparing for, responding to, and recovering from the adverse health effects of public health emergencies, in part through formal collaborations between hospitals, health systems, community health centers, public health departments, and community organizations via health care coalitions (HCCs). HCCs endeavor to meet the medical surge demands inherent to disasters and to improve health outcomes before, during, and after public health emergencies. Nevertheless, significant changes in health economics and policy can impact the operations, capabilities, and scope of HCCs. Specifically, hospital consolidation and the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are altering the national health care landscape, as well as the emergency preparedness sector, and are challenging HCCs to adapt to large-scale, industry-wide transformations. This article examines HCCs in the context of the developments of hospital consolidation and the ACA in order to facilitate future discourse regarding the strategy and policy of HCCs amid a changing economic and political landscape. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:698–703)

Challenge of Hospital Emergency Preparedness: Analysis and Recommendations

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (S1) ◽  
pp. S74-S82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Barbera ◽  
Dale J. Yeatts ◽  
Anthony G. Macintyre
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Natural Disasters ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Health Care ◽  
Medical Emergency

ABSTRACTIn the United States, recent large-scale emergencies and disasters display some element of organized medical emergency response, and hospitals have played prominent roles in many of these incidents. These and other well-publicized incidents have captured the attention of government authorities, regulators, and the public. Health care has assumed a more prominent role as an integral component of any community emergency response. This has resulted in increased funding for hospital preparedness, along with a plethora of new preparedness guidance.Methods to objectively measure the results of these initiatives are only now being developed. It is clear that hospital readiness remains uneven across the United States. Without significant disaster experience, many hospitals remain unprepared for natural disasters. They may be even less ready to accept and care for patient surge from chemical or biological attacks, conventional or nuclear explosive detonations, unusual natural disasters, or novel infectious disease outbreaks.This article explores potential reasons for inconsistent emergency preparedness across the hospital industry. It identifies and discusses potential motivational factors that encourage effective emergency management and the obstacles that may impede it. Strategies are proposed to promote consistent, reproducible, and objectively measured preparedness across the US health care industry. The article also identifies issues requiring research. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2009;3(Suppl 1):S74–S82)

scholarly journals (A169) Strategic National Stockpile: American Preparedness to a Domestic Biological Attack

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (S1) ◽  
pp. s59-s59
Author(s):  
A.E. Piombino
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Technical Assistance ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
The Us ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Strategic National Stockpile

This session offers an overview of the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS) and the Cities Readiness Initiative (CRI), including CHEM PACK. Managed by the US Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “push-packs” of this critical federal cache of pharmaceuticals and medical materiel are at sites located throughout the country. The CDC's CRI is a federally funded program designed to compliment the SNS and enhance preparedness in the nation's largest cities and Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA) where more than 50% of the US population resides. Through CRI, state and large metropolitan public health departments continue refining plans to respond to a large-scale bioterrorism attack by dispensing antibiotics to the entire population of an identified MSA with 48 hours. The SNS Technical Assistance Review (TAR) will be reviewed, as well as best practices and lessons learned from successful public health emergency preparedness and response programs throughout the US.

Current State of (Dis)Integration: Public Health and Fusion Centers

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cody Minks ◽  
Anke Richter
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Information Sharing ◽  
Homeland Security ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Limiting Factor ◽  
Fusion Centers ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Public Health Information

AbstractObjectiveResponding to large-scale public health emergencies relies heavily on planning and collaboration between law enforcement and public health officials. This study examines the current level of information sharing and integration between these domains by measuring the inclusion of public health in the law enforcement functions of fusion centers.MethodsSurvey of all fusion centers, with a 29.9% response rate.ResultsOnly one of the 23 responding fusion centers had true public health inclusion, a decrease from research conducted in 2007. Information sharing is primarily limited to information flowing out of the fusion center, with little public health information coming in. Most of the collaboration is done on a personal, informal, ad-hoc basis. There remains a large misunderstanding of roles, capabilities, and regulations by all parties (fusion centers and public health). The majority of the parties appear to be willing to work together, but there but there is no forward momentum to make these desires a reality. Funding and staffing issues seem to be the limiting factor for integration.ConclusionThese problems need to be urgently addressed to increase public health preparedness and enable a decisive and beneficial response to public health emergencies involving a homeland security response.

scholarly journals Health Care Coalitions as Response Organizations: Houston After Hurricane Harvey

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 637-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori Upton ◽  
Thomas D. Kirsch ◽  
Melissa Harvey ◽  
Dan Hanfling
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Services ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
The United States ◽  
Operational Planning ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
East Texas ◽  
Health And Human Services ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Response Information

AbstractHealth care coalitions play an increasingly important role in both preparedness for, response to, and recovery from large scale disaster events occurring across the United States. The actions taken by the South East Texas Regional Advisory Council (SETRAC) in response to the landfall of Hurricane Harvey, and the consequential flooding that ensued, serve as an excellent example of how health care coalitions are increasingly needed to play a unifying role in response. This paper highlights a number of the strategic planning, operational planning and response, information sharing, and resource coordination and management activities that were undertaken for the response to Hurricane Harvey. The successful response to this devastating storm in the Houston, Texas area serves as an example to other regions across the country as they work to implement the 2017-2022 health care capabilities articulated by the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:637–639)

scholarly journals 18.H. Workshop: Bringing evidence during public health emergencies: addressing the challenge through HTA

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Emergency Preparedness And Response ◽  
Public Health Emergency Preparedness

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and irrefutable evidence may be lacking. The process of including evidence in public health decision-making and for evidence-informed policy, in preparation, and during public health emergencies, is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absences of shared tools and approaches for evidence-based preparedness and response planning. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability and to implement coordinated evidence-based response plans. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. As a multidisciplinary, standardized and evidence-based decision-making tool, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) represents and approach that can inform public health emergency preparedness and response planning processes; it can also provide meaningful insights on existing preparedness structures, working as bridge between scientists and decision-makers, easing knowledge transition and translation to ensure that evidence is effectively integrated into decision-making contexts. HTA can address the link between scientific evidence and decision-making in public health emergencies, and overcome the key challenges faced by public health experts when advising decision makers, including strengthening and accelerating knowledge transfer through rapid HTA, improving networking between actors and disciplines. It may allow a 360° perspective, providing a comprehensive view to decision-making in preparation and during public health emergencies. The objective of the workshop is to explore and present how HTA can be used as a shared and systematic evidence-based tool for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response, in order to enable stakeholders and decision makers taking actions based on the best available evidence through a process which is systematic and transparent. Key messages There are many barriers and no shared mechanisms to bring evidence in decision-making during public health emergencies. HTA can represent the tool to bring evidence-informed actions in public health emergency preparedness and response.

Evaluating Perceived Emergency Preparedness and Household Preparedness Behaviors: Results from a CASPER Survey in Fairfax, Virginia

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-228
Author(s):  
Rennie W. Ferguson ◽  
Shawn Kiernan ◽  
Ernst W. Spannhake ◽  
Benjamin Schwartz
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Household Level ◽  
Perceived Preparedness ◽  
Chi Squared ◽  
Public Health Emergency Response ◽  
Household Preparedness ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRACTObjectives:Using data collected from a Community Assessment for Public Health Emergency Response (CASPER) conducted in Fairfax Health District, Virginia, in 2016, we sought to assess the relationship between household-level perceived preparedness and self-reported preparedness behaviors.Methods:Weighted population estimates and 95% confidence intervals were reported, and Pearson’s chi-squared test was used to investigate differences by group.Results:Examining responses to how prepared respondents felt their household was to handle a large-scale emergency or disaster, an estimated 7.4% of respondents (95% CI: 4.3–12.3) reported that their household was “completely prepared,” 37.3% (95% CI: 31.4–43.7) were “moderately prepared,” 38.2% (95% CI: 31.6–45.2) were “somewhat prepared,” and 14.4% (95% CI: 10.2–20.0) were “unprepared.” A greater proportion of respondents who said that their household was “completely” or “moderately” prepared for an emergency reported engaging in several behaviors related to preparedness. However, for several preparedness behaviors, there were gaps between perceived preparedness and self-reported readiness.Conclusions:Community assessments for public health preparedness can provide valuable data about groups who may be at risk during an emergency due to a lack of planning and practice, despite feeling prepared to handle a large-scale emergency or disaster.

scholarly journals Application of Health-Care Networking in COVID-19: A Brief Report

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Punidha Kaliaperumal ◽  
Tamorish Kole ◽  
Neha Chugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Public Health Care ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Delivery Of Care ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Northern India ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Private And Public

ABSTRACT Health-care systems all over the world are stretched out and being reconfigured to deal with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Some countries have flattened the curve, some are still fighting to survive it, and others are embracing the second wave. Globally, there is an urgent need to increase the resilience, capacity, and capability of health-care systems to deal with the current crisis and improve upon the future responses. The epidemiological burden of COVID-19 has led to rapid exhaustion of local response resources and massive disruption to the delivery of care in many countries. Health-care networking and liaison are essential component in disaster management and public health emergencies. It aims to provide logistical support between hospitals; financial support through local or regional governmental and nongovernmental agencies for response; manpower and mechanism for coordination and to implement policies, procedures, and technologies in the event of such crisis. This brief report describes how 4 independent private hospitals in northern India had adopted the principles of health-care networking, pooled their resources, and scaled up 1 of the partner hospitals as Dedicated COVID-19 Hospital (DCH) to treat moderate to severe category of COVID-19 patients. It brings out the importance of a unique coalition between private and public health-care system.

scholarly journals Tools for Assessment of Country Preparedness for Public Health Emergencies: A Critical Review

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Haeberer ◽  
Svetla Tsolova ◽  
Paul Riley ◽  
Rosa Cano-Portero ◽  
Ute Rexroth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Communicable Disease ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
System Response ◽  
Self Assessment ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
User Friendly

ABSTRACT Recent international communicable disease crises have highlighted the need for countries to assure their preparedness to respond effectively to public health emergencies. The objective of this study was to critically review existing tools to support a country’s assessment of its health emergency preparedness. We developed a framework to analyze the expected effectiveness and utility of these tools. Through mixed search strategies, we identified 12 tools with relevance to public health emergencies. There was considerable consensus concerning the critical preparedness system elements to be assessed, although their relative emphasis and means of assessment and measurement varied considerably. Several tools identified appeared to have reporting requirements as their primary aim, rather than primary utility for system self-assessment of the countries and states using the tool. Few tools attempted to give an account of their underlying evidence base. Only some tools were available in a user-friendly electronic modality or included quantitative measures to support the monitoring of system preparedness over time. We conclude there is still a need for improvement in tools available for assessment of country preparedness for public health emergencies, and for applied research to increase identification of system measures that are valid indicators of system response capability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document