Successful Hospital Evacuation After the Kumamoto Earthquakes, Japan, 2016

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 517-521 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takashi Nagata ◽  
Shinkichi Himeno ◽  
Akihiro Himeno ◽  
Manabu Hasegawa ◽  
Alan Kawarai Lefor ◽  
...  

AbstractTwo major earthquakes struck Kumamoto Prefecture in Japan in April 2016. Disaster response was immediately provided, including disaster medical services. Many hospitals were damaged and patients needed immediate evacuation to alternative facilities. The hospital bed capacity of Kumamoto Prefecture was overwhelmed, and transportation of more than 100 patients was needed. Hospital evacuation was carried out smoothly with the coordinated efforts of multiple agencies. The overall operation was deemed a success because patients were transported in a timely manner without any significant adverse events. Upon repair of facilities in Kumamoto Prefecture, patients were returned safely to their previous facilities. The management of inpatients after this natural disaster in Kumamoto Prefecture can serve as a model for hospital evacuation with multi-agency coordination in the future. Future efforts are needed to improve interfacility communications immediately following a natural disaster. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:517–521)

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 728-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georges C. Benjamin

ABSTRACTThe last 14 years has taught us that that we are facing a new reality; a reality in which public health emergencies are a common occurrence. Today, we live in a world with dangerous people without state sponsorship who are an enormous threat to our safety; one where emerging and reemerging infectious diseases are waiting to break out; a world where the benefits of globalization in trade, transportation, and social media brings threats to our communities faster and with a greater risk than ever before. Even climate change has entered into the preparedness equation, bringing with it the forces of nature in the form of extreme weather and its complications. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:728–729)


2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 210-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heather E. Kaiser ◽  
Daniel J. Barnett ◽  
Edbert B. Hsu ◽  
Thomas D. Kirsch ◽  
James J. James ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBackground: Although the training of future physicians in disaster preparedness and public health issues has been recognized as an important component of graduate medical education, medical students receive relatively limited exposure to these topics. Recommendations have been made to incorporate disaster medicine and public health preparedness into medical school curricula. To date, the perspectives of future physicians on disaster medicine and public health preparedness issues have not been described.Methods: A Web-based survey was disseminated to US medical students. Frequencies, proportions, and odds ratios were calculated to assess perceptions and self-described likelihood to respond to disaster and public health scenarios.Results: Of the 523 medical students who completed the survey, 17.2% believed that they were receiving adequate education and training for natural disasters, 26.2% for pandemic influenza, and 13.4% for radiological events, respectively; 51.6% felt they were sufficiently skilled to respond to a natural disaster, 53.2% for pandemic influenza, and 30.8% for radiological events. Although 96.0% reported willingness to respond to a natural disaster, 93.7% for pandemic influenza, and 83.8% for a radiological event, the majority of respondents did not know to whom they would report in such an event.Conclusions: Despite future physicians' willingness to respond, education and training in disaster medicine and public health preparedness offered in US medical schools is inadequate. Equipping medical students with knowledge, skills, direction, and linkages with volunteer organizations may help build a capable and sustainable auxiliary workforce. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2009;3:210–216)


Author(s):  
Thomas J Best ◽  
Burhaneddin Sandikci ◽  
Donald D. Eisenstein ◽  
David Owen Meltzer

2006 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 391-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elif Akcali ◽  
Murray J Côté ◽  
Chin Lin

Author(s):  
I. A. Zheleznyakova ◽  
L. A. Kovaleva ◽  
T. A. Khelisupali ◽  
M. A. Voinov ◽  
V. V. Omel’yanovskii

2011 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 224-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olan A. Soremekun ◽  
Richard D. Zane ◽  
Andrew Walls ◽  
Matthew B. Allen ◽  
Kimberly J. Seefeld ◽  
...  

AbstractBackground: The ability to generate hospital beds in response to a mass-casualty incident is an essential component of public health preparedness. Although many acute care hospitals' emergency response plans include some provision for delaying or canceling elective procedures in the event of an inpatient surge, no standardized method for implementing and quantifying the impact of this strategy exists in the literature. The aim of this study was to develop a methodology to prospectively emergency plan for implementing a strategy of delaying procedures and quantifying the potential impact of this strategy on creating hospital bed capacity.Methods: This is a pilot study. A categorization methodology was devised and applied retrospectively to all scheduled procedures during four one-week periods chosen by convenience. The categorization scheme grouped procedures into four categories: (A) procedures with no impact on inpatient capacity; (B) procedures that could be delayed indefinitely; (C) procedures that could be delayed by one week; and (D) procedures that could not be delayed. The categorization scheme was applied by two research assistants and an emergency medicine resident. All three raters categorized the first 100 cases to allow for calculation of inter-rater reliability. Maximal hospital bed capacity was defined as the 95th percentile weekday occupancy, as this is more representative of functional bed capacity than is the number of licensed beds. The main outcome was the number of hospital beds that could be created by postponing procedures in categories B and C.Results: Maximal hospital bed capacity was 816 beds. Mean occupancy during weekdays was 759 versus 694 on weekends. By postponing Group B and C procedures, a mean of 60 beds (51 general medical/surgical and nine intensive care unit (ICU)) could be created on weekdays, and four beds (three general medical/surgical and one ICU) on weekends. This represents 7.3% and 0.49% of maximal hospital bed capacity and ICU capacity, respectively. In the event that sustained surge is needed, delaying all category B and C procedures for one week would lead to the generation of 1,235 hospital-bed days. Inter-rater reliability was high (kappa = 0.74) indicating good agreement between all three raters.Conclusions: For the institution studied, the strategy of delaying scheduled procedures could generate inpatient capacity with maximal impact during weekdays and little impact on weekends. Future research is needed to validate the categorization scheme and increase the ability to predict inpatient surge capacity across various hospital types and sizes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document