Development of a Hospital Medical Surge Preparedness Index using a national hospital survey

Hospital surge capacity preparedness in disasters and emergencies: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Adequate and effective emergency preparedness for hospital surge capacity is a prerequisite to ensuring standard healthcare services for disaster victims. This study aimed to identify, review, and synthesize the preparedness activities for and the barriers to hospital surge capacity in disasters and emergencies.

METHODS

We systematically searched seven databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, Embase, Ovid, and PsycINFO). We included all English peer-reviewed studies published in January 2016 and July 2022 on surge capacity preparedness in hospital settings. Two independent researchers screened titles and abstracts, reviewed the full texts, and conducted data extractions using CADIMA software. We assessed the rigor of the included studies using the NIH quality assessment tools for quantitative studies, the Noyes et al. guidelines for qualitative studies, and the MMAT tool for mixed methods studies and summarized findings using the narrative synthesis method. We also used PRISMA reporting guidelines.

RESULTS

From the 2560 studies identified, we finally include 13 peer-reviewed studies: 10 quantitative, one qualitative, and two mixed methods. Five studies were done in the USA, three in Iran (n = 3), and the remaining in Australia, Pakistan, Sweden, Taiwan, and Tanzania. The study identified various ways to increase hospital surge capacity preparedness in all four domains (staff, stuff, space, and system); among them, the use of the Hospital Medical Surge Preparedness Index and the Surge Simulation Tool for surge planning was noteworthy. Moreover, nine studies (69%) recognized several barriers to hospital surge capacity preparedness.

CONCLUSION

The review provides synthesized evidence of contemporary literature on strategies for and barriers to hospital surge capacity preparedness. Despite the risk of selection bias due to the omission of gray literature, the study findings could help hospital authorities, public health workers, and policymakers to develop effective plans and programs for improving hospital surge capacity preparedness with actions, such as enhancing coordination, new or adapted flows of patients, disaster planning implementation, or the development of specific tools for surge capacity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022360332.

Preparing for the next outbreak: A review of indices measuring outbreak preparedness, vulnerability, and resilience

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the need for relevant metrics describing the resources and community attributes that affect the impact of communicable disease outbreaks. Such tools can help inform policy, assess change, and identify gaps to potentially reduce the negative outcomes of future outbreaks. The present review was designed to identify available indices to assess communicable disease outbreak preparedness, vulnerability, or resilience, including articles describing an index or scale developed to address disasters or emergencies which could be applied to addressing a future outbreak. This review assesses the landscape of indices available, with a particular focus on tools assessing local-level attributes. This systematic review yielded 59 unique indices applicable to assessing communicable disease outbreaks through the lens of preparedness, vulnerability, or resilience. However, despite the large number of tools identified, only 3 of these indices assessed factors at the local level and were generalizable to different types of outbreaks. Given the influence of local resources and community attributes on a wide range of communicable disease outcomes, there is a need for local-level tools that can be applied broadly to various types of outbreaks. Such tools should assess both current and long-term changes in outbreak preparedness with the intent to identify gaps, inform local-level decision makers, public policy, and future response to current and novel outbreaks.

Hospital Surge Capacity Preparedness in Disasters and Emergencies: Protocol for a Systematic Review

Hospitals' medical surge preparedness or surge capacity preparedness plays a significant role in reducing mortalities and in the treatment of severe injuries in disasters and emergencies. Though actions or activities for surge capacity preparedness of hospitals are discussed in several studies, they remain fragmented and need to be compiled. This systematic review will provide a comprehensive synthesis of evidence of actions or steps taken to strengthen hospitals' medical surge preparedness in disasters and emergencies, which will eventually help develop surge capacity programs and relevant policies. All the studies published in peer-reviewed journals between 1 January 2016 and 30 July 2022, with full text available, will be included in this review. Seven electronic databases-PubMed, Scopus, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO, and Ovid-will be searched. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts using the eligibility criteria, review full-text articles, and extract data with the help of CADIMA software. A third reviewer will help resolve any discrepancies during the whole process. The extracted data will be narratively synthesized with the key characteristics and findings of the studies. The NIH quality assessment tools will be used to scale up the the quality of the retrieved quantitative studies. Moreover, the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) and Noyes et al. guidelines will be used to assess the mixed methods studies and qualitative studies quality assessment, respectively.

A method for detailed determination of hospital surge capacity: a prerequisite for optimal preparedness for mass-casualty incidents

BACKGROUND

Defined goals for hospitals' ability to handle mass-casualty incidents (MCI) are a prerequisite for optimal planning as well as training, and also as base for quality assurance and improvement. This requires methods to test individual hospitals in sufficient detail to numerically determine surge capacity for different components of the hospitals. Few such methods have so far been available. The aim of the present study was with the use of a simulation model well proven and validated for training to determine capacity-limiting factors in a number of hospitals, identify how these factors were related to each other and also possible measures for improvement of capacity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

As simulation tool was used the MACSIM® system, since many years used for training in the international MRMI courses and also successfully used in a pilot study of surge capacity in a major hospital. This study included 6 tests in three different hospitals, in some before and after re-organisation, and in some both during office- and non-office hours.

RESULTS

The primary capacity-limiting factor in all hospitals was the capacity to handle severely injured patients (major trauma) in the emergency department. The load of such patients followed in all the tests a characteristic pattern with "peaks" corresponding to ambulances return after re-loading. Already the first peak exceeded the hospitals capacity for major trauma, and the following peaks caused waiting times for such patients leading to preventable mortality according to the patient-data provided by the system. This emphasises the need of an immediate and efficient coordination of the distribution of casualties between hospitals. The load on surgery came in all tests later, permitting either clearing of occupied theatres (office hours) or mobilising staff (non-office hours) sufficient for all casualties requiring immediate surgery. The final capacity-limiting factors in all tests was the access to intensive care, which also limited the capacity for surgery. On a scale 1-10, participating staff evaluated the accuracy of the methodology for test of surge capacity to MD 8 (IQR 2), for improvement of disaster plans to MD 9 (IQR 2) and for simultaneous training to MD 9 (IQR 3).

CONCLUSIONS

With a simulation system including patient data with a sufficient degree of detail, it was possible to identify and also numerically determine the critical capacity-limiting factors in the different phases of the hospital response to MCI, to serve as a base for planning, training, quality control and also necessary improvement to rise surge capacity of the individual hospital.

Using a national level cross-sectional study to develop a Hospital Preparedness Index (HOSPI) for Covid-19 management: A case study from India

Background

We developed a composite index–hospital preparedness index (HOSPI)–to gauge preparedness of hospitals in India to deal with COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We developed and validated a comprehensive survey questionnaire containing 63 questions, out of which 16 critical items were identified and classified under 5 domains: staff preparedness, effects of COVID-19, protective gears, infrastructure, and future planning. Hospitals empaneled under Ayushman Bharat Yojana (ABY) were invited to the survey. The responses were analyzed using weighted negative log likelihood scores for the options. The preparedness of hospitals was ranked after averaging the scores state-wise and district-wise in select states. HOSPI scores for states were classified using K-means clustering.

Findings

Out of 20,202 hospitals empaneled in ABY included in the study, a total of 954 hospitals responded to the questionnaire by July 2020. Domains 1, 2, and 4 contributed the most to the index. The overall preparedness was identified as the best in Goa, and 12 states/ UTs had scores above the national average score. Among the states which experienced high COVID-19 cases during the first pandemic wave, we identified a cluster of states with high HOSPI scores indicating better preparedness (Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh and Andhra Pradesh), and a cluster with low HOSPI scores indicating poor preparedness (Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Uttarakhand).

Interpretation

Using this index, it is possible to identify areas for targeted improvement of hospital and staff preparedness to deal with the COVID-19 crisis.

A data-driven approach to measuring epidemiological susceptibility risk around the world

Epidemic outbreaks are extreme events that become more frequent and severe, associated with large social and real costs. It is therefore important to assess whether countries are prepared to manage epidemiological risks. We use a fully data-driven approach to measure epidemiological susceptibility risk at the country level using time-varying information. We apply both principal component analysis (PCA) and dynamic factor model (DFM) to deal with the presence of strong cross-section dependence in the data. We conduct extensive in-sample model evaluations of 168 countries covering 17 indicators for the 2010-2019 period. The results show that the robust PCA method accounts for about 90% of total variability, whilst the DFM accounts for about 76% of the total variability. Our index could therefore provide the basis for developing risk assessments of epidemiological risk contagion. It could be also used by organizations to assess likely real consequences of epidemics with useful managerial implications.

Systematic media review: A novel method to assess mass-trauma epidemiology in absence of databases-A pilot-study in Rwanda

Objective

Surge capacity refers to preparedness of health systems to face sudden patient inflows, such as mass-casualty incidents (MCI). To strengthen surge capacity, it is essential to understand MCI epidemiology, which is poorly studied in low- and middle-income countries lacking trauma databases. We propose a novel approach, the “systematic media review”, to analyze mass-trauma epidemiology; here piloted in Rwanda.

Methods

A systematic media review of non-academic publications of MCIs in Rwanda between January 1^st, 2010, and September 1^st, 2020 was conducted using NexisUni, an academic database for news, business, and legal sources previously used in sociolegal research. All articles identified by the search strategy were screened using eligibility criteria. Data were extracted in a RedCap form and analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Findings

Of 3187 articles identified, 247 met inclusion criteria. In total, 117 MCIs were described, of which 73 (62.4%) were road-traffic accidents, 23 (19.7%) natural hazards, 20 (17.1%) acts of violence/terrorism, and 1 (0.09%) boat collision. Of Rwanda’s 30 Districts, 29 were affected by mass-trauma, with the rural Western province most frequently affected. Road-traffic accidents was the leading MCI until 2017 when natural hazards became most common. The median number of injured persons per event was 11 (IQR 5–18), and median on-site deaths was 2 (IQR 1–6); with natural hazards having the highest median deaths (6 [IQR 2–18]).

Conclusion

In Rwanda, MCIs have decreased, although landslides/floods are increasing, preventing a decrease in trauma-related mortality. By training journalists in “mass-casualty reporting”, the potential of the “systematic media review” could be further enhanced, as a way to collect MCI data in settings without databases.

The Application of a Hospital Medical Surge Preparedness Index to Assess National Pandemic and Other Mass Casualty Readiness

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This article describes the use and findings of the Hospital Medical Surge Preparedness Index (HMSPI) tool to improve the understanding of hospitals' ability to respond to mass casualty events such as the COVID-19 pandemic. For this investigation, data from the U.S. Census Bureau, the Dartmouth Atlas Project, and the 2005 to 2014 annual surveys of the American Hospital Association (AHA) were analyzed. The HMSPI tool uses variables from the AHA survey and the other two sources to allow facility, county, and referral area index calculations. Using the three data sets, the HMSPI also allows for an index calculation for per capita ratios and by political (state or county) boundaries. In this use case, the results demonstrated increases in county and state HMSPI scores through the period of analysis; however, no statistically significant difference was found in HMSPI scores between 2013 and 2014. The HMSPI builds on the limited scientific foundation of medical surge preparedness and could serve as an objective and standardized measure to assess the nation's medical readiness for crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic and other large-scale emergencies such as mass shootings. Future studies are encouraged to refine the score, assess the validity of the HMSPI, and evaluate its relevance in response to future legislative and executive policies that affect preparedness measures.