Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T17:22:56.663Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Patient Presentation Trends at 15 Mass-Gathering Events in South Australia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 June 2018

Olga Anikeeva ,
Paul Arbon ,
Kathryn Zeitz ,
Murk Bottema ,
Adam Lund ,
Sheila Turris  and
Malinda Steenkamp
Olga Anikeeva*
Affiliation:
Torrens Resilience Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
Paul Arbon
Affiliation:
Torrens Resilience Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
Kathryn Zeitz
Affiliation:
Torrens Resilience Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
Murk Bottema
Affiliation:
Torrens Resilience Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
Adam Lund
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Sheila Turris
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Malinda Steenkamp
Affiliation:
Torrens Resilience Institute, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
*
Correspondence: Olga Anikeeva, PhD Torrens Resilience Institute Flinders University GPO Box 2100 Adelaide, South Australia 5001, Australia E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction

Mass gatherings are complex events that present a unique set of challenges to attendees’ health and well-being. There are numerous factors that influence the number and type of injuries and illnesses that occur at these events, including weather, event and venue type, and crowd demographics and behavior.

Problem

While the impact of some factors, such as weather conditions and the availability of alcohol, on patient presentations at mass gatherings have been described previously, the influence of many other variables, including crowd demographics, crowd behavior, and event type, is poorly understood. Furthermore, a large number of studies reporting on the influence of these variables on patient presentations are based on anecdotal evidence at a single mass-gathering event.

Methods

Data were collected by trained fieldworkers at 15 mass gatherings in South Australia and included event characteristics, crowd demographics, and weather. De-identified patient records were obtained from on-site health care providers. Data analysis included the calculation of patient proportions in each variable category, as well as the total number of patient presentations per event and the patient presentation rate (PPR).

Results

The total number of expected attendees at the 15 mass gatherings was 303,500, of which 146 presented to on-site health care services. The majority of patient presentations occurred at events with a mean temperature between 20°C and 25°C. The PPR was more than double at events with a predominantly male crowd compared to events with a more equal sex distribution. Almost 90.0% of patient presentations occurred at events where alcohol was available.

Conclusion:

The results of the study suggest that several weather, crowd, and event variables influence the type and number of patient presentations observed at mass-gathering events. Given that the study sample size did not allow for these interactions to be quantified, further research is warranted to investigate the relationships between alcohol availability, crowd demographics, crowd mobility, venue design, and injuries and illnesses.

Anikeeva O, Arbon P, Zeitz K, Bottema M, Lund A, Turris S, Steenkamp M. Patient presentation trends at 15 mass-gathering events in South Australia. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2018;33(4):368–374.

Keywords

environmentevent planningfirst aidmass gathering
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , August 2018 , pp. 368 - 374
Copyright
© World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2018 

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.)

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest/funding: This study was funded by the Australian Research Council (ARC; Canberra, Australia) Discovery Projects scheme (project number: DP140101448). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

1. Turris, SA, Lund, A, Hutton, A, et al. Mass-gathering health research foundational theory: Part 2 - event modeling for mass gatherings. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(6):655-663.Google Scholar
2. Arbon, PA. The development of conceptual models for mass-gathering health. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2004;19(3):208-212.Google Scholar
3. Milsten, AM, Maguire, BJ, Bissell, RA, Seaman, KG. Mass gathering medical care: a review of the literature. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2002;17(3):151-162.Google Scholar
4. Soomaroo, L, Murray, V. Weather and environmental hazards at mass gatherings. PLoS Curr. 2012;4:e4fca9ee30afc4.Google Scholar
5. Bowdish, GE, Cordell, WH, Bock, HC, Vukov, LF. Using regression analysis to predict emergency patient volume at the Indianapolis 500-mile race. Ann Emerg Med. 1992;21(10):1200-1203.Google Scholar
6. Dress, JM, Horton, EH, Florida, R. Music, mud, and medicine. Woodstock ‘94: a maniacal, musical, mass-casualty incident. Emerg Med Serv. 1995;24(1):30-32.Google Scholar
7. Florida, R, Goldfarb, Z. Woodstock ‘94: peace, music, and EMS. JEMS. 1994;19(12):45-50.Google Scholar
8. Friedman, LJ, Rodi, SW, Krueger, MA, Votey, SR. Medical care at the California AIDS Ride 3: experiences in event medicine. Ann Emerg Med. 1998;31(2):219-223.Google Scholar
9. Gordon, D. The Pope’s visit: mass gatherings and the EMS system. Emerg Med Serv. 1988;17(1):38-44.Google Scholar
10. Paul, HM. Mass casualty: Pope’s Denver visit causes mega MCI. JEMS. 1993;18(11):64-68; 72-75.Google Scholar
11. Schulte, D, Meade, DM. The Papal chase. The Pope’s visit: a “mass” gathering. Emerg Med Serv. 1993;22(11):46-49; 65-75,79.Google Scholar
12. Perron, AD, Brady, WJ, Custalow, CB, Johnson, DM. Association of head index and patient volume at a mass gathering event. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2005;9(1):49-52.Google Scholar
13. Arbon, PA, Bridgewater, FH, Smith, C. Mass gathering medicine: a predictive model for patient presentations and transport rates. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2001;16(3):150-158.Google Scholar
14. Michael, JA, Barbera, JA. Mass gathering medical care: a twenty-five-year review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 1997;12(4):305-312.Google Scholar
15. Brunko, M. Emergency physicians and special events. J Emerg Med. 1989;7(4):405-406.Google Scholar
16. Nordberg, M. EMS and mass gatherings. Emerg Med Serv. 1990;19(5):46-48; 50-51,54,56,91.Google Scholar
17. Arbon, PA, Cusack, L, Verdonk, NR. Mass gathering public health and emergency medicine literature review: levels of evidence. Australasian Journal of Paramedicine. 2013;10(1):5.Google Scholar
18. Zeitz, K, Zeitz, C, Arbon, PA. Forecasting medical work at mass-gathering events: predictive model versus retrospective review. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2005;20(3):164-168.Google Scholar