Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T10:33:25.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Epidemiologic Assessment of Mortality, Building Collapse Pattern, and Medical Response after the 1992 Earthquake in Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Derek C. Angus ,
Ernesto A. Pretto ,
Joel I. Abrams ,
Norma Ceciliano ,
Yukihiro Watoh ,
Bülent Kirimli ,
Agah Certug  and
Louise K. Comfort
Derek C. Angus
Affiliation:
Health Delivery and Systems Evaluation Team (HeDSET), Critical Care Medicine Division, Department of Anesthesiology/CCM,University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Ernesto A. Pretto*
Affiliation:
Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Joel I. Abrams
Affiliation:
School of Engineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Norma Ceciliano
Affiliation:
Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Yukihiro Watoh
Affiliation:
Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Bülent Kirimli
Affiliation:
Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
Agah Certug
Affiliation:
EGE University, Izmir, Turkey
Louise K. Comfort
Affiliation:
Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
*
Safar Center for Resuscitation Research, 3434 Fifth Ave., Suite 201, University of PittsburghPittsburgh, PA 15260USA E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background:

Post-earthquake engineering and epidemiologic assessments are important for the development of injury prevention strategies. This paper describes mortality and its relationship to building collapse patterns and initial medical responses following the 1992 earthquake in Erzincan, Turkey.

Methods:

The study consisted of: 1) background data collection and review; 2) design and implementation of a field survey; and 3) site inspection of building collapse patterns. The survey included: 1) national (n = 11) and local (n = 17) officials; 2) medical and search and rescue (SAR) workers (n = 38); and 3) a geographically stratified random sample of lay survivors (n = 105). The survey instruments were designed to gather information regarding location, injuries, initial actions and prior training of survivors and responders, and the location, injuries, and management of dead and dying victims. A case-control design was constructed to assess the relationship between mortality, location, and building collapse pattern.

Results:

There was extensive structural damage throughout the region, especially in the city where mid-rise, unreinforced masonry buildings (MUMBs) incorporating a “soft” first floor design (large store windows for commercial use) and one story adobe structures were most vulnerable to collapse. Of 526 people who died in the city, 87% (n = 456) were indoors at the time of the earthquake. Of these, 92% (n = 418) died in MUMBs. Of 54 witnessed deaths, 55% (n = 28) of victims died slowly, the majority of whom (n = 26) were pinned or trapped (p <0.05). Of 42 MUMB occupants identified through the survey, those who died (n = 25) were more likely to have been occupying the ground floor when compared with survivors (n = 28) (p <0.01). Official medical and search and rescue responders arrived after most deaths had occurred. Prior first-aid or rescue training of lay, uninjured survivors was associated with a higher likelihood of rescuing and resuscitating others (p <0.001).

Conclusion:

During an earthquake, MUMBs with soft ground floor construction are highly lethal, especially for occupants on the ground floor, suggesting that this building type is inappropriate for areas of seismic risk. The vulnerability of MUMBs appears due to a lack of lateral force resistance as a result of the use of glass store fiont windows and the absence of shear walls. The prevalence of this building type in earthquake-prone regions needs to be investigated further. A large portion of victims dying in an earthquake die slowly at the scene of injury. Prior public first-aid and rescue training programs increase participation in rescue efforts in major earthquakes and may improve survival.

Keywords

building collapsedisasterdisaster medicineearthquakeearthquake engineeringearthquake epidemiologyemergency medical responselifesaving potentialsearch and rescue
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , September 1997 , pp. 49 - 58
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Office of US Foreign Disaster Assistance: Disaster History: Significant Data on Major Disasters Worldwide, 1900—present. Washington, DC: Agency for International Development. 1990; pp 1–145.Google Scholar
2. Kvetan, V, Angus, DC: Critical Care Medicine in Disasters. Shoemaker, WC, Ayres, S, Grenvik, A, Holbrook, PR, (eds). Textbook of Critical Care. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders & Co. 1995; pp 114–125.Google Scholar
3. Hall, JF (ed): Northridge Earthquake, 17 January 1994: Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute; 1994; pp 42–44.Google Scholar
4. Comartin, CD, Greene, M (eds): The Hyogo-Ken Nanbu Earthquake: 17 January 1995: Preliminary Reconnaissance Report. Oakland, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. No.4; 1995; pp 22–29.Google Scholar
5. United Nations Centre for Regional Development: Comprehensive Study of the Great Hanshin Earthquake. Nagoya, Japan; 1995; pp 74–75.Google Scholar
6. Cole, EE: Costa Rica earthquake of 22 April 1991: Reconnaissance report. Earthquake Spectra 1991;7(Supplement B. 91-02):41–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. State and Federal Hazard Mitigation Team: Loma Prieta Earthquake, 17 October 1989, Survey Report. Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency. FEMA-845-DR-CA; 1990; pp 17–18.Google Scholar
8. Loma Prieta Earthquake Reconnaissance Report: Socioeconomic impacts of emergency response. Earthquake Spectra 1990;6:393–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9. Klain, M, Ricci, E, Safar, P, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia I. Preliminary results and methodology. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1989;4:135–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Ricci, EM, Pretto, EA, Safar, P, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia II. Method for evaluation of medical response to major disasters. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1991;6:159–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Pretto, EA, Ricci, EM, Klain, M, Safar, P: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia III. Results, conclusions and recommendations. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1992;7:327–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Bissell, RA, Pretto, EA, Angus, DC, et al: Post-preparedness medical disaster response in Costa Rica. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:96–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Pretto, EA, Angus, DC, Abrams, JI, et al: An analysis of prehospital deaths in an earthquake. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Barka, AA, Toksoz, MN, Gulen, L, Kadinsky-Cade, K: Segmentation, seismicity and earthquake potential of the eastern part of the North Anatolian fault zone, Yerbilimleri. Earth Science 1987;14:337–352.Google Scholar
15. Gulkan, P: A preliminary field reconnaisance report on the Erzincan earthquake of 13 March 1992. El Cirrito, CA. Learning from Earthquakes Project, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute; 1992.Google Scholar
16. Gulkan, P, Ergunay, O: Proceedings of the Turkish Disaster Management Seminar. Ankara, Turkey. United Nations Disaster Relief Organization (UNDRO), United Nations Development Program (UNDP). 1992.Google Scholar
17. Government of Turkey: State Institute of Statistics: 1984 Census of Buildings (for Places with Municipality). Ankara, Turkey [Turkish]. 1984.Google Scholar
18. Earthquake Research Institute MO: The Erzincan Earthquake of 18 November 1983. Ankara, Turkey [Turkish]. 1983.Google Scholar
19. Angus, DC, Pretto, EA, Shen, B, et al: Use of a modified trauma score in the pre-hospital assessment of disaster victims. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1993;8:S146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20. Niederman, MS, Bass, JB, Campbell, GD, et al: Guidelines for the initial management of adults with community acquired pneumonia: Diagnosis, assessments of severity, and initial antimicrobial therapy. American Review of Respiratory Diseases 1993;148:1418–1426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21. Teasdale, G, Jennett, B: Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness: A practical scale. Lancet 1974;2:81–84.Google Scholar
22. US Department of the Interior DO US Geological Survey: The Severity of an Earthquake. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. No.273-494 QL3; 1990.Google Scholar
23. Glass, RI, Urrutia, JJ, Sibony, S, et al: Earthquake injuries related to housing in a Guatemalan village. Science 1977;197:638–643.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Comfort, L, Tekin, A, Pretto, EA, et al: Time, knowledge and action: The effect of trauma upon community capacity for action. Intl J Mass Emergencies and Disasters 1998;16.Google Scholar
25. Comfort, LK: International disaster assistance in the Mexico City earthquake. New World 1986;1:12–43.Google Scholar
26. Drabek, TE: Managing Multi-organizational Emergency Responses. University of Colorado, (ed). Boulder: University of Colorado, Institute of Behavioral Science; 1981.Google Scholar
27. Rubin, C: Community Recovery from a Major Natural Disaster. Boulder: University of Colorado, Institute of Behavioral Science; 1985.Google Scholar
28. Quarantelli, EL: Disasters: Theory and Research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications; 1978.Google Scholar
29. Noji, EK, Kelen, GD, Armenian, HK, et al: The 1988 earthquake in Soviet Armenia: A case study. Ann Emerg Med 1990;19:891–897.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
30. Sheng, CY: Medical support in the Tangshan earthquake: A review of the management of mass casualties and certain major injuries. J Trauma 1987;27:1130.Google ScholarPubMed
31. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): An Assessment of Damage and Casualties for Six Cities in the Central United States Resulting from Earthquakes in the New Madrid Seismic Zone. Washington, DC. No. EMK-C-0057; 1985.Google Scholar
32. Nishenko, SP, Bollinger, GA: Forecasting damaging earthquakes in the central and eastern United States. Science 1990;249:1412–1416.Google Scholar
33. Emergency Management Institute NF, Federal Emergency Management Agency: Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) Course. Washington, D.C. No. IG-317 1994.Google Scholar
34. Angus, DC, Pretto, EA, Abrams, J, Safar, P: Life-supporting first-aid training of the lay public for disaster preparedness. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1991;6:257. Abstract.Google Scholar
35. Abrams, JA, Pretto, EA, Angus, DC, Safar, P: Basic extrication training of the lay public for disaster preparedness. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1993;8:151–156.Google Scholar
36. Angus, DC, Kvetan, V: Organization and management of critical care systems in unconventional situations. Crit Care Clin 1993;9:521–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
37. Schultz, CH, Koenig, KL, Noji, EK: A medical disaster response to reduce immediate mortality after an earthquake. N Engl J Med 1996;334:438–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed