Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T23:30:04.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Evaluation of Research Methods during Disaster Exercises: Applicability for Improving Disaster Health Management

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 March 2012

G.A. Guido Legemaate ,
Frederick M Burkle Jr  and
Joost J.L.M. Bierens
G.A. Guido Legemaate*
Affiliation:
Fire Department Amsterdam-Amstelland, Department of Crisis Management, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Frederick M Burkle Jr
Affiliation:
Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, Harvard School of Public Health, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
Joost J.L.M. Bierens
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, VU University Medical Center (VUmc), Amsterdam, The Netherlands
*
Correspondence: G.A.G. Legemaate, MSc Fire Department Amsterdam-Amstelland Department of Crisis ManagementPostbox 92171 1090 AD Amsterdam The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction: The objective of this study was to investigate whether disaster exercises can be used as a proxy environment to evaluate potential research instruments designed to study the application of medical care management resources during a disaster.

Methods: During an 06 April 2005 Ministerial-level exercise in the Netherlands, three functional areas of patient contact were assessed: (1) Command and Control, through the application of an existing incident management system questionnaire; (2) patient flow and quality of patient distribution, through registration of data from prehospital casualty collection points, ambulances, and participating trauma centers (with inclusion of data in a flow chart); and (3) hospital coping capacity, through timed registration reports from participating trauma centers.

Results: The existing incident management system questionnaire used for evaluating Command and Control during a disaster exercise would benefit from minor adaptations and validation that could not be anticipated in the exercise planning stage. Patient flow and the quality of patient distribution could not be studied during the exercise because of inconsistencies among data, and lack of data from various collection points. Coping capacity was better measured by using 10-minute rather than one hour time intervals, but provided little information regarding bottlenecks in surge capacity.

Conclusion: Research instruments can be evaluated and improved when tested during a disaster exercise. Lack of data recovery hampers disaster research even in the artificial setting of a national disaster exercise. Providers at every level must be aware that proper data collection is essential to improve the quality of health care during a disaster, and that predisaster cooperation is crucial to validate patient outcomes. These problems must be addressed pre-exercise by stakeholders and decision-makers during planning, education, and training. If not, disaster exercises will not meet their full potential.

Keywords

disaster exercisesdisaster health managementdisaster research methodology
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , February 2012 , pp. 18 - 26
Copyright
Copyright Legemaate © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2012

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

Sundnes, KO, Birnbaum, ML (eds): Health disaster management: guidelines for evaluation and research in the Utstein style. Prehosp Disaster Med 2003;17:Suppl 3:1–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, GB, Modi, S, Lunney, K et al. , : Generic evaluation methods for disaster drills in developing countries. Ann Emerg Med 2003;41:5:689–699.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kulling, P, Birnbaum, M, Murray, V et al. , : Guidelines for reports on health crises and critical health events. Prehosp Disaster Med 2010;25;4:377–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harten van, SM, Bierens, JJLM, Welling, L et al. , : The Volendam fire: lessons learned from disaster research. Prehosp Disaster Med 2006;21:5:303–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. Bonfire: The Netherlands can withstand Terrorist Threat. Available at: http://www.oefeningbonfire.nl in Dutch. Accessed 18 November 2011.Google Scholar
Jamieson, S: Likert scales: How to (ab)use them. Med Educ 2004;38:1212–1218.Google Scholar
Thomas, TL, Hsu, EB, Kim, HK et al. , : The incident command system in disasters: Evaluation methods for a hospital-based exercise. Prehosp Disaster Med 2005;20:1:14–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dib, JE, Naderi, S, Sheridan, IA et al. , : Analysis and applicability of the Dutch EMS system into countries developing EMS systems. J Emerg Med 2006;30:111–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Juffermans, JHM, Bierens, JJLM: Recurrent medical response problems during five recent disasters in the Netherlands. Prehosp Disaster Med 2010;25:127–136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welling, L, Harten van, SM, Patka, P et al. , : Medical management after indoors fires: A review. Burns 2005;31:6:673–678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Debacker, MAM, Bierens, JJLM, Rampengeneeskunde (Disaster Medicine). In: Codex Medicus Online. Available at http://www.codexmedicus.nl/sectie/45/Chap45disp5700/Medische_behandelcapaciteit_(MBC).html in Dutch. Accessed 18 November 2011.Google Scholar
Arnold, JL, Paturas, J, Rodoplu, Ű: Measures of effectiveness of hospital incident command system performance. Prehosp Disaster Med 2005;20:3:202–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paris, PM, Stewart, RD, Pelton, GH: Triage success in disasters: Dynamic patient-tracking cards. Am J Emerg Med 1985;3:4:323–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joy, TL, Kemp, HN: Managing the hurricane Katrina disaster in the Midwest. J Trauma Nurs 2007;14:270–272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walderhaug, S, Meland, PH, Mikalsen, M et al. , : Evacuation support system for improved medical documentation and information flow in the field. Int J Med Inform 2007;77:2:137–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed