Engendering enthusiasm for sustainable disaster critical care response: why this is of consequence to critical care professionals?

How are healthcare provider systems preparing for health emergency situations?

Natural disasters, disease outbreaks, famine, and human conflict have strained communities everywhere over the course of human existence. However, modern changes in climate, human mobility, and other factors have increased the global community's vulnerability to widespread emergencies. We are in the midst of a disruptive health event, with the COVID-19 pandemic testing our health provider systems globally. This study presents a qualitative analysis of published literature, obtained systematically, to examine approaches health providers are taking to prepare for and respond to mass casualty incidents around the globe. The research reveals emerging trends in the weaknesses of systems' disaster responses while highlighting proposed solutions, so that others may better prepare for future disasters. Additionally, the research examines gaps in the literature, to foster more targeted and actionable contributions to the literature.

Flexible surge capacity - public health, public education, and disaster management

Background: Failed attempts to improve the delivery of healthcare to communities show distinct flaws that have a higher impact during a major incident or disaster (MID). This study evaluates the concept of surge capacity, which intends to achieve a balance between the needs and resources in affected areas by providing staff, stuff, structure, and system.

Methods: A systematic literature review was performed according to the PRISMA statement and by using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar, and related keywords.

Results: There were limited publications about flexible surge capacity (FSC). However, the sum of data obtained indicated the need for flexibility in expanding major incidents or disasters, demanding new resources, which may neither be available on time nor reachable due to infrastructural damage.

Conclusion: FSC is a novel concept based on international guidelines. It refers to the extra and adjustable human and material resources that can be mobilized by activating nonprofessional but educated staff and different but accepted facilities in a fast, smooth, and productive way. Public health and public education play an essential role in obtaining such flexibility.

Engagement and education: care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

BACKGROUND

Engagement and education of ICU clinicians in disaster preparedness is fragmented by time constraints and institutional barriers and frequently occurs during a disaster. We reviewed the existing literature from 2007 to April 2013 and expert opinions about clinician engagement and education for critical care during a pandemic or disaster and offer suggestions for integrating ICU clinicians into planning and response. The suggestions in this article are important for all of those involved in a pandemic or large-scale disaster with multiple critically ill or injured patients, including front-line clinicians, hospital administrators, and public health or government officials.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed and suggestions formulated according to the American College of Chest Physicians (CHEST) Consensus Statement development methodology. We assessed articles, documents, reports, and gray literature reported since 2007. Following expert-informed sorting and review of the literature, key priority areas and questions were developed. No studies of sufficient quality were identified upon which to make evidence-based recommendations. Therefore, the panel developed expert opinion-based suggestions using a modified Delphi process.

RESULTS

Twenty-three suggestions were formulated based on literature-informed consensus opinion. These suggestions are grouped according to the following thematic elements: (1) situational awareness, (2) clinician roles and responsibilities, (3) education, and (4) community engagement. Together, these four elements are considered to form the basis for effective ICU clinician engagement for mass critical care.

CONCLUSIONS

The optimal engagement of the ICU clinical team in caring for large numbers of critically ill patients due to a pandemic or disaster will require a departure from the routine independent systems operating in hospitals. An effective response will require robust information systems; coordination among clinicians, hospitals, and governmental organizations; pre-event engagement of relevant stakeholders; and standardized core competencies for the education and training of critical care clinicians.

Challenge of hospital emergency preparedness: analysis and recommendations

In the United States, recent large-scale emergencies and disasters display some element of organized medical emergency response, and hospitals have played prominent roles in many of these incidents. These and other well-publicized incidents have captured the attention of government authorities, regulators, and the public. Health care has assumed a more prominent role as an integral component of any community emergency response. This has resulted in increased funding for hospital preparedness, along with a plethora of new preparedness guidance.Methods to objectively measure the results of these initiatives are only now being developed. It is clear that hospital readiness remains uneven across the United States. Without significant disaster experience, many hospitals remain unprepared for natural disasters. They may be even less ready to accept and care for patient surge from chemical or biological attacks, conventional or nuclear explosive detonations, unusual natural disasters, or novel infectious disease outbreaks.This article explores potential reasons for inconsistent emergency preparedness across the hospital industry. It identifies and discusses potential motivational factors that encourage effective emergency management and the obstacles that may impede it. Strategies are proposed to promote consistent, reproducible, and objectively measured preparedness across the US health care industry. The article also identifies issues requiring research.

Preparedness lessons from modern disasters and wars

Disasters come in all shapes and forms, and in varying magnitudes and intensities. Nevertheless, they offer many of the same lessons for critical care practitioners and responders. Among these, the most important is that well thought out risk assessment and focused planning are vital. Such assessment and planning require proper training for providers to recognize and treat injury from disaster, while maintaining safety for themselves and others. This article discusses risk assessment and planning in the context of disasters. The article also elaborates on the progress toward the creation of portable, credible, sustainable, and sophisticated critical care outside the walls of an intensive care unit. Finally, the article summarizes yields from military-civilian collaboration in disaster planning and response.

Emergency Mass Critical Care

At any moment regular television programming could be interrupted with news of the emergence of a new strain of infective agent, a major industrial accident, or a terrorist event. Many devastating events are widespread and naturally occurring, like hurricanes, in which we have ample warning time to enact preparation plans; while others, like earthquakes, volcanoes, or tsunamis may kill or injure thousands before the news reports hit the airwaves. Industrial accidents and terrorist events are usually sudden and occur without any warning. Any of these events may have a local or regional effect; some may even have a global impact [1]. Regardless of the cause, after such an event, large amounts of the populace will be seeking medical care, whether from their primary care providers, public health departments, or local hospitals.

Definitive care for the critically ill during a disaster: current capabilities and limitations: from a Task Force for Mass Critical Care summit meeting, January 26-27, 2007, Chicago, IL

In the twentieth century, rarely have mass casualty events yielded hundreds or thousands of critically ill patients requiring definitive critical care. However, future catastrophic natural disasters, epidemics or pandemics, nuclear device detonations, or large chemical exposures may change usual disaster epidemiology and require a large critical care response. This article reviews the existing state of emergency preparedness for mass critical illness and presents an analysis of limitations to support the suggestions of the Task Force on Mass Casualty Critical Care, which are presented in subsequent articles. Baseline shortages of specialized resources such as critical care staff, medical supplies, and treatment spaces are likely to limit the number of critically ill victims who can receive life-sustaining interventions. The deficiency in critical care surge capacity is exacerbated by lack of a sufficient framework to integrate critical care within the overall institutional response and coordination of critical care across local institutions and broader geographic areas.

Providing critical care during a disaster: the interface between disaster response agencies and hospitals

OBJECTIVE

Recent natural disasters have highlighted shortfall areas in current hospital disaster preparedness. These include the following: 1) insufficient coordination between hospitals and civil/governmental response agencies; 2) insufficient on-site critical care capability; 3) a lack of "portability" of acute care processes (i.e., patient transport and/or bringing care to the patient); 4) education shortfalls; and 5) the inability of hospitals to align disaster medical requirements with other competing priorities.

CONCLUSIONS

Definition of the roles and responsibilities of a hospital during a disaster requires additional planning precision beyond the prehospital response phase. Planners must also better define plans for circumstances when or if a hospital is rendered unusable. Disaster medical training of hospital personnel has been inadequate. This article details the specifics of these issues and outlines various potential approaches to begin addressing and formulating remedies to these shortfalls.