Geographic information systems (GIS) and geospatial technology (GT) can help hospitals improve plans for postdisaster surge by assessing numbers of potential patients in a catchment area and providing estimates of special needs populations, such as pediatrics. In this study, census-derived variables are computed for blockgroups within a 3-mile radius from Children's Hospital Los Angeles (CHLA) and from Los Angeles County–University of Southern California (LAC–USC) Medical Center. Landslide and liquefaction zones are overlaid on US Census Bureau blockgroups. Units that intersect with the hazard zones are selected for computation of pediatric surge potential in case of an earthquake. In addition, cartographic visualization and cluster analysis are performed on the entire 3-mile study area to identify hot spots of socially vulnerable populations. The results suggest the need for locally specified vulnerability models for pediatric populations. GIS and GT have untapped potential to contribute local specificity to planning for surge potential after a disaster. Although this case focuses on an earthquake hazard, the methodology is appropriate for an all-hazards approach. With the advent of Google Earth, GIS output can now be easily shared with medical personnel for broader application and improvement in planning.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:163–169)

Objective: To describe initiatives undertaken by a network of community pediatricians to increase a city's surge capacity for patients presenting with influenza-like illnesses during the 2009 H1N1 influenza A pandemic.

Methods: This was a descriptive quality improvement project detailing the measures employed by a network of private practice community pediatricians in Houston, Texas, caring for both insured and uninsured children.

Results: Four categories of interventions were used: enhanced communication, increasing community pediatrician presence, vaccine distribution, and targeted viral diagnosis and antiviral utilization. Promoting communication between clinicians, families, and an affiliated local tertiary care children's hospital allowed for the efficient coordination of resources as well as a unified and consistent message. Increasing access of families to their primary medical home by employing additional clinicians, extending office hours, and locating additional space served to decrease the number of children with low-acuity illness seen in the local emergency centers. Vaccine distribution was enhanced by effective communication between clinicians and families. Finally, targeted antiviral testing and adherence to national recommendations on antiviral utilization enabled judicious utilization of a limited supply of antiviral medications.

Conclusions: Effective communication and improved access to health care enabled children within the network with influenza-like illnesses to continue to be cared for in their medical home. The measures used in response to novel influenza virus outbreaks can be adapted for other situations requiring increased community surge capacity.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness 2012;6:113-116)

Context: A disaster is indiscriminate in whom it affects. Limited research has shown that the poor and medically underserved, especially in rural areas, bear an inequitable amount of the burden.

Objective: To review the literature on the combined effects of a disaster and living in an area with existing health or health care disparities on a community's health, access to health resources, and quality of life.

Methods: We performed a systematic literature review using the following search terms: disaster, health disparities, health care disparities, medically underserved, and rural. Our inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed, US studies that discussed the delayed or persistent health effects of disasters in medically underserved areas.

Results: There has been extensive research published on disasters, health disparities, health care disparities, and medically underserved populations individually, but not collectively.

Conclusions: The current literature does not capture the strain of health and health care disparities before and after a disaster in medically underserved communities. Future disaster studies and policies should account for differences in health profiles and access to care before and after a disaster.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:30-38)

Objective: The paucity of evidence and wide variation among communities creates challenges for developing congressionally mandated national performance standards for public health preparedness. Using countermeasure dispensing as an example, we present an approach for developing standards that balances national uniformity and local flexibility, consistent with the quality of evidence available.

Methods: We used multiple methods, including a survey of community practices, mathematical modeling, and expert panel discussion.

Results: The article presents recommended dispensing standards, along with a general framework that can be used to analyze tradeoffs involved in developing other preparedness standards.

Conclusions: Standards can be developed using existing evidence, but would be helped immensely by a stronger evidence base.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:285-290)

US government programs and communications regarding citizen preparedness for disasters rest on several untested, and therefore unverified, assumptions. We explore the assumptions related to citizen preparedness promotion and argue that in spite of extensive messaging about the importance of citizen preparedness and countless household surveys purporting to track the preparedness activities of individuals and households, the role individual Americans are being asked to play is largely based on conventional wisdom. Recommendations for conceptualizing and measuring citizen preparedness are discussed.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:170–173)

It is only possible to achieve a resilient community and an integrated, comprehensive, and resilient health system that can respond effectively to a public health emergency through active collaboration, coordination, and shared responsibility among a broad group of public and private stakeholders and the community itself. The Institute of Medicine established the Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Catastrophic Events in 2007 to provide a neutral venue for dialogue and collaboration among stakeholders in the preparedness field. In the Forum's first year, the members began to address topics such as medical countermeasures dispensing, crisis standards of care, and medical surge capacity. In the past 9 months, the Forum members have expanded their areas of interest in response to current events and national areas of focus. Current topics include individual, family, and community preparedness and resiliency; medical countermeasures from development through dispensing; and the response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Across all of the initiatives undertaken by the Forum, the common element is that they tackle problems, gaps, and future opportunities that can only be successfully addressed if multiple stakeholders work together.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:174-177)

The series of earthquakes and aftershocks that have hit Christchurch, New Zealand, for more than one year has been severe and sustained, resulting in major damage to homes, buildings, essential services, and resources in water, sewerage, food, access to health care, energy for heating and cooling, and unprecedented challenges to resiliency. Large swathes of destroyed buildings, land damage, and liquefaction have made rebuilding impossible for many. Populations have moved or report that they either wish to or plan to do so. For those who remain, a ”new normal” mindset has taken hold and serves as an objective measure for the process that defines daily life and future decisions. The new normal serves as an uncomfortable but realistic guideline by which further resiliency can be measured. A number of factors have led to the development of the new normal state for the Christchurch earthquake survivors.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:33-43)

We examined the response of 11 Los Angeles County (LAC) hospitals designated as Disaster Resource Centers (DRCs) to a statewide, earthquake preparedness drill, LAC's most comprehensive earthquake disaster drill to date. Semistructured interviews were conducted with the coordinators of 11 of the 14 LAC DRCs within 3 weeks of the drill. Interviews were transcribed and thematic analysis was supported by analytical software (Atlas.ti). Except for one pediatric specialty DRC, most DRCs did little to fully test their institutions' capacity to manage pediatric patients. Few DRCs included children as mock victims. Little or no attention was focused on pediatric triage and other pediatric clinical, psychosocial, and resource issues. Respondents maintained that community readiness is hampered by compartmentalizing the preparedness planning, training, and drilling. Without a mandate to coordinate with other agencies, few DRCs reported coordination with other community entities. Those that did were in smaller submunicipalities within LAC. Community coordination is critical to effective response to disasters, yet disaster preparedness planning and drills are most often uncoordinated and compartmentalized. Drills and training need to be transdisciplinary and coordinated with other community entities likely to play a role in pediatric disaster management.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2012;6:182–186)