Attitudes of Members of Public to Mass Casualty Incidents in Singapore

Abstract

Introduction:

Mass casualty incidents result in mass casualties at short notice and stress healthcare systems. Research shows the critical potential role laypersons have by providing time critical intervention, on-scene, while awaiting arrival of emergency services, thus reducing mortality.

This study aims to demonstrate the attitudes of laypersons to responding to mass casualty incidents in Singapore.

Method:

Laypersons were invited to participate in a pilot course aimed at training laypersons principles and interventions for mass casualty incidents. This was developed by the Disaster Volunteer Corps of Singapore General Hospital Department of Emergency Medicine. Respondents were invited to answer a questionnaire which aimed to explore knowledge and prior experiences, willingness, attitudes, and readiness. Descriptive statistics were analyzed, and free-text responses were categorized into various headings by theme.

Results:

A total of 29/30 course enrollees responded to the questionnaire. Twenty (69%) participants were female. The median age was 50 years old (IQR 35-56.5). Most of the participants were employed (82.7%) and were Singapore Citizens (89.7%).

65.5% had no previous experience with first aid, and none had experience with MCIs. Understanding of mass casualty incidents was poorly understood, 1.42/5 (±0.56).

Respondents were most willing to assist in conventional disasters as compared to other types. Competency in voluntary role and altruism were the most important motivators as compared to compensation which was the least.

Overall, there is a high understanding that Singapore is at risk of disasters but most respondents do not have emergency plans in place for disaster situations.

Conclusion:

This study shows that while laypersons are willing, most do not have the knowledge or experience to respond to mass casualty incidents. This mirrors previous studies in Singapore relating to attitudes and knowledge of laypersons to CPR and AED.

More research and intervention is needed into the attitudes and willingness of members of public and mass casualty incidents.