We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Bombings, including the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, remain an important public health threat. However, there has been little investigation into the impressions of injury risk or protective factors of bombing survivors.
Objective:
This study analyzes Oklahoma City bombing survivors' impressions of factors that influenced their risk of injury, and validates a hazard timeline outlining phases of injury risk in a building bombing.
Methods:
In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted within a sample of Oklahoma City bombing survivors. Participants included 15 injured and uninjured survivors, who were located in three buildings surrounding the detonation site during the attack.
Results:
Risk factor themes included environmental glass, debris, and entrapment. Protective factors included knowledge of egress routes, shielding behaviors to deflect debris, and survival training. Building design and health status were reported as risk and protective factors. The hazard timeline was a useful tool, but should be modified to include a lay rescue phase. The combination of a narrative approach and direct questioning is an effective method of gathering the perceptions of survivors.
Conclusions:
Investigating survivors' impressions of building bombing hazards is critical to capture injury exposures, behavior patterns, and decision-making processes during actual events, and to identify interventions that will be supported by survivors.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.