scholarly journals Characterization of Carbon Monoxide Exposure During Hurricane Sandy and Subsequent Nor’easter

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 562-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Schnall ◽  
Royal Law ◽  
Amy Heinzerling ◽  
Kanta Sircar ◽  
Scott Damon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Carbon Monoxide ◽  
Hurricane Sandy ◽  
Atlantic City ◽  
Economic Damage ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Power Sources ◽  
Poison Centers ◽  
State And Local

ABSTRACTObjectiveCarbon monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless gas produced by fossil fuel combustion. On October 29, 2012, Hurricane Sandy moved ashore near Atlantic City, New Jersey, causing widespread morbidity and mortality, $30 to $50 billion in economic damage, and 8.5 million households to be without power. The combination of power outages and unusually low temperatures led people to use alternate power sources, placing many at risk for CO exposure.MethodsWe examined Hurricane Sandy–related CO exposures from multiple perspectives to help identify risk factors and develop strategies to prevent future exposures. This report combined data from 3 separate sources (health departments, poison centers via the National Poison Data System, and state and local public information officers).ResultsResults indicated that the number of CO exposures in the wake of Hurricane Sandy was significantly greater than in previous years. The persons affected were mostly females and those in younger age categories and, despite messaging, most CO exposures occurred from improper generator use.ConclusionsOur findings emphasize the continued importance of CO-related communication and ongoing surveillance of CO exposures to support public health response and prevention during and after disasters. Additionally, regional poison centers can be a critical resource for potential on-site management, public health promotion, and disaster-related CO exposure surveillance. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:562–567)

scholarly journals New York State Public Health System Response to Hurricane Sandy: Lessons From the Field

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 443-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asante Shipp Hilts ◽  
Stephanie Mack ◽  
Millicent Eidson ◽  
Trang Nguyen ◽  
Guthrie S. Birkhead
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
New York ◽  
New York State ◽  
Hurricane Sandy ◽  
System Response ◽  
Health Staff ◽  
Health Departments ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Public Health Preparedness ◽  
York State

AbstractObjectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct interviews with public health staff who responded to Hurricane Sandy and to analyze their feedback to assess response strengths and challenges and recommend improvements for future disaster preparedness and response.MethodsQualitative analysis was conducted of information from individual confidential interviews with 35 staff from 3 local health departments in New York State (NYS) impacted by Hurricane Sandy and the NYS Department of Health. Staff were asked about their experiences during Hurricane Sandy and their recommendations for improvements. Open coding was used to analyze interview transcripts for reoccurring themes, which were labeled as strengths, challenges, or recommendations and then categorized into public health preparedness capabilities.ResultsThe most commonly cited strengths, challenges, and recommendations related to the Hurricane Sandy public health response in NYS were within the emergency operations coordination preparedness capability, which includes the abilities of health department staff to partner among government agencies, coordinate with emergency operation centers, conduct routine conference calls with partners, and manage resources.ConclusionsHealth departments should ensure that emergency planning includes protocols to coordinate backup staffing, delineation of services that can be halted during disasters, clear guidelines to coordinate resources across agencies, and training for transitioning into unfamiliar disaster response roles. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2016;10:443–453)

Disaster behavioral health capacity: Findings from a multistate preparedness assessment

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 281
Author(s):  
Megan Peck, MPH ◽  
Tai Mendenhall, PhD ◽  
Louise Stenberg, MPH ◽  
Nancy Carlson, BS ◽  
Debra K. Olson, DNP
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Behavioral Health ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Mutual Aid ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Health Training ◽  
Interagency Coordination ◽  
Trained Interviewer ◽  
State And Local

Purpose: To identify gaps in disaster behavioral health, the Preparedness and Emergency Response Learning Center (PERL) at the University of Minnesota's School of Public Health supported the development and implementation of a multistate disaster behavioral health preparedness assessment. Information was gathered regarding worker knowledge of current disaster behavioral health capacity at the state and local level, and perceived disaster behavioral health training needs and preferences.Methods: Between May and July 2015, 143 participants completed a 31-item uniform questionnaire over the telephone by a trained interviewer. Trained interviewers were given uniform instructions on administering the questionnaire. Participants included county- and city-level public health leaders and directors from Minnesota, Wisconsin, and North Dakota.Findings: Findings demonstrate that across the three states there is a need for improved disaster behavioral health training and response plans for before, during, and after public health emergencies. This study identified perceived gaps in plans and procedures for meeting the disaster behavioral health needs of different at-risk populations, including children, youth, and those with mental illness. There was consistent agreement among participants about the lack of behavioral health coordination between agencies during emergency events.Value: Findings can be used to inform policy and the development of trainings for those involved in disaster behavioral health. Effectively attending to interagency coordination and mutual aid agreements, planning for effective response and care for vulnerable populations, and targeted training will contribute to a more successful public health response to emergency events.

Redistribution of Emergency Department Patients After Disaster-Related Closures of a Public Versus Private Hospital in New York City

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 256-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. Lee ◽  
Silas W. Smith ◽  
Brendan G. Carr ◽  
Lewis R. Goldfrank ◽  
Daniel Polsky
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care Access ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Hurricane Sandy ◽  
Public Hospitals ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Complex Needs ◽  
Hospital Closures ◽  
Public Versus Private

AbstractSudden hospital closures displace patients from usual sources of care and force them to access facilities that lack their prior medical records. For patients with complex needs and for nearby hospitals already strained by high volume, disaster-related hospital closures induce a public health emergency. Our objective was to analyze responses of patients from public versus private emergency departments after closure of their usual hospital after Hurricane Sandy. Using a statewide database of emergency visits, we followed patients with an established pattern of accessing 1 of 2 hospitals that closed after Hurricane Sandy: Bellevue Hospital Center and NYU Langone Medical Center. We determined how these patients redistributed for emergency care after the storm. We found that proximity strongly predicted patient redistribution to nearby open hospitals. However, for patients from the closed public hospital, this redistribution was also influenced by hospital ownership, because patients redistributed to other public hospitals at rates higher than expected by proximity alone. This differential response to hospital closures demonstrates significant differences in how public and private patients respond to changes in health care access during disasters. Public health response must consider these differences to meet the needs of all patients affected by disasters and other public health emergencies. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:256-264).

US Screening of International Travelers for Radioactive Contamination After the Japanese Nuclear Plant Disaster in March 2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 291-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Todd Wilson ◽  
Arthur Chang ◽  
Andre Berro ◽  
Aaron Still ◽  
Clive Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Low Frequency ◽  
Development Planning ◽  
Radioactive Material ◽  
Screening Methods ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
State And Local

ABSTRACTOn March 11, 2011, a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami damaged nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi complex in Japan, resulting in radionuclide release. In response, US officials augmented existing radiological screening at its ports of entry (POEs) to detect and decontaminate travelers contaminated with radioactive materials. During March 12 to 16, radiation screening protocols detected 3 travelers from Japan with external radioactive material contamination at 2 air POEs. Beginning March 23, federal officials collaborated with state and local public health and radiation control authorities to enhance screening and decontamination protocols at POEs. Approximately 543 000 (99%) travelers arriving directly from Japan at 25 US airports were screened for radiation contamination from March 17 to April 30, and no traveler was detected with contamination sufficient to require a large-scale public health response. The response highlighted synergistic collaboration across government levels and leveraged screening methods already in place at POEs, leading to rapid protocol implementation. Policy development, planning, training, and exercising response protocols and the establishment of federal authority to compel decontamination of travelers are needed for future radiological responses. Comparison of resource-intensive screening costs with the public health yield should guide policy decisions, given the historically low frequency of contaminated travelers arriving during radiological disasters.(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:291–296)

scholarly journals Strengthening Health Surveillance through the Development of Interagency Relationships

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily V. Glidden ◽  
Royal Law
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Public Health Practice ◽  
Health Surveillance ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Poison Control ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Poison Center ◽  
Poison Centers ◽  
State And Local ◽  
Agency Collaborations

Objective- To discuss the development of a set of tools for interagency collaborations on health surveillance- To determine the core contents of the tools based on known gaps in health surveillance- To determine collaborators in development and timelines for completionIntroductionIn 2010, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE) identified data collected by poison centers (PCs) as an important tool for all-hazards exposure and illness surveillance. In response to this, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), CSTE, and the American Association of Poison Control Centers (AAPCC) members created the Poison Center Public Health Community of Practice (CoP). The CoP acts as a platform, to facilitate sharing experiences, identify best practices, and develop relationships among federal agencies, state and local health departments (HD), and PCs. Since its inception, the CoP garnered over 250 members, hosted more than 25 webinars regarding PC-HD collaborations, and produced five newsletters highlighting subjects pertinent to PC and HD personnel.DescriptionFindings and lessons learned from activities outlined in the introduction include the need for: 1) standardized inter-agency communication, 2) increased knowledge and utilization of state reporting and monitoring systems, and 3) inter-agency collaborations to prevent the duplication of efforts. In this roundtable, we will: 1) discuss how to develop information and tools for inter-agency public health communication and messaging, 2) identify key stakeholders including potential national, state, and local agencies who can help bolster communication messaging, and 3) develop appropriate points of contact within these agencies. Potential components of the guidance may include: 1) a comprehensive list of state resources available to PC and PH personnel, 2) recommended inter-agency points of contact, 3) lessons learned from collaborative projects, and 4) PC abilities to share and analyze data for public health practice and health surveillance.How the Moderator Intends to Engage the Audience in Discussions on the TopicThis roundtable session will consider the following questions:- Which agencies--local, state, national, or otherwise-- would benefit from inter-agency collaborations health surveillance efforts?- What should the proposed tools include? Who should be involved in developing the proposed materials?Following this roundtable, the CoP hopes to have tangible next steps in creating inter-agency collaborations health surveillance guidance and establish a timeline for completion. 

scholarly journals The Public Health Road Map to Respond to the Growing Dementia Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin S Olivari ◽  
Molly E French ◽  
Lisa C McGuire
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Public Health Response ◽  
Cognitive Health ◽  
Local Public Health ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Road ◽  
Road Map ◽  
Health Response ◽  
State And Local

Abstract As the proportion of older adults in the United States is projected to increase dramatically in the coming decades, it is imperative that public health address and maintain the cognitive health of this growing population. More than 5 million Americans live with Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias (ADRD) today, and this number is projected to more than double by 2050. The public health community must be proactive in outlining the response to this growing crisis. Promoting cognitive decline risk reduction, early detection and diagnosis, and increasing the use and availability of timely data are critical components of this response. To prepare state, local, and tribal organizations, CDC and the Alzheimer’s Association have developed a series of Road Maps that chart the public health response to dementia. Since the initial Healthy Brain Initiative (HBI) Road Map release in 2007, the Road Map has undergone two new iterations, with the most recent version, The HBI’s State and Local Public Health Partnerships to Address Dementia: The 2018–2023 Road Map, released in late 2018. Over the past several years, significant advances were made in the science of risk reduction and early detection of ADRD. As a result, the public health response requires a life-course approach that focuses on reducing risk and identifying memory issues earlier to improve health outcomes. The most recent Road Map was revised to accommodate these strides in the science and to effect change at the policy, systems, and environment levels. The 2018–2023 Road Map identifies 25 actions that state and local public health agencies and their partners can implement to promote cognitive health and address cognitive impairment and the needs of caregivers. The actions are categorized into four traditional domains of public health, and the Road Map can help public health and its partners chart a course for a dementia-prepared future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document