Education and Training Initiatives for Crisis Management in the European Union: A Web-based Analysis of Available Programs.

ABSTRACT Introduction Education and training are key elements of disaster management. Despite national and international educational programs in disaster management, there is no standardized curriculum available to guide the European Union (EU) member states. European- based Disaster Training Curriculum (DITAC), a multiple university-based project financially supported by the EU, is charged with developing a holistic and highly-structured curriculum and courses for responders and crisis managers at a strategic and tactical level. The purpose of this study is to qualitatively assess the prevailing preferences and characteristics of disaster management educational and training initiatives (ETIs) at a postgraduate level that currently exist in the EU countries.
An Internet-based qualitative search was conducted in 2012 to identify and analyze the current training programs in disaster management. The course characteristics were evaluated for curriculum, teaching methods, modality of delivery, target groups, and funding.
The literature search identified 140 ETIs, the majority (78%) located in United Kingdom, France, and Germany. Master level degrees were the primary certificates granted to graduates. Face-to-face education was the most common teaching method (84%). Approximately 80% of the training initiatives offered multi- and cross-disciplinary disaster management content. A competency-based approach to curriculum content was present in 61% of the programs. Emergency responders at the tactical level were the main target group. Almost all programs were self-funded.
Although ETIs currently exist, they are not broadly available in all 27 EU countries. Also, the curricula do not cover all key elements of disaster management in a standardized and competency-based structure. This study has identified the need to develop a standardized competency-based educational and training program for all European countries that will ensure the practice and policies that meet both the standards of care and the broader expectations for professionalization of the disaster and crisis workforce. Ingrassia PL , Foletti M , Djalali A , Scarone P , Ragazzoni L , Della Corte F , Kaptan K , Lupescu O , Arculeo C , von Arnim G , Friedl T , Ashkenazi M , Heselmann D , Hreckovski B , Khorrram-Manesh A , Komadina R , Lechner K , Patru C , Burkle FM Jr. , Fisher P . Education and training initiatives for crisis management in the European Union: a web-based analysis of available programs. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(2):1-12 .


Available from: Pier Luigi Ingrassia, May 22, 2014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Disaster response demands a large workforce covering diverse professional sectors. Throughout this article, we illustrate the results of a systematic review of peer-reviewed studies to identify existing competency sets for disaster management and humanitarian assistance that would serve as guidance for the development of a common disaster curriculum. A systematic review of English-language articles was performed on PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, ERIC, and Cochrane Library. Studies were included if reporting competency domains, abilities, knowledge, skills, or attitudes for professionals involved disaster relief or humanitarian assistance. Exclusion criteria included abstracts, citations, case studies, and studies not dealing with disasters or humanitarian assistance. Thirty-eight papers were analyzed. Target audience was defined in all articles. Five references (13%) reported cross-sectorial competencies. Most of the articles (81.6%) were specific to health care. Eighteen (47%) papers included competencies for at least 2 different disciplines and 18 (47%) for different professional groups. Nursing was the most widely represented cadre. Eighteen papers (47%) defined competency domains and 36 (94%) reported list of competencies. Nineteen articles (50%) adopted consensus-building to define competencies, and 12 (31%) included competencies adapted to different professional responsibility levels. This systematic review revealed that the largest number of papers were mainly focused on the health care sector and presented a lack of agreement on the terminology used for competency-based definition. ( Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness . 2015;0:1-10)
    Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness 05/2015; DOI:10.1017/dmp.2015.24 · 1.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Hospitals are expected to serve the medical needs of casualties in the face of a disaster or other crisis, including man-made conflicts. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the 2011 Yemeni revolution on hospital disaster preparedness in the capital city of Sana'a. The study was conducted in September 2011 and 2013. For evaluation purposes, the hospital emergency response checklist published by the World Health Organization (WHO) was used. Additional information was also obtained to determine what steps were being taken by hospital authorities to improve hospital preparedness. The study selected 11 hospitals. At the time of the first evaluation, 7 hospitals were rated "unacceptable" for level of preparedness and 4 were rated "insufficient," receiving a WHO checklist rating of 10 to 98. At the second evaluation, 5 hospitals were rated "unacceptable," 3 "insufficient," and 1 "effective," receiving a rating of 9 to 134. Unfortunately, this study shows that between 2011 and 2013, no significant progress was made in hospital disaster preparedness in Sana'a. In a disaster-prone country like Yemen, the current situation calls for drastic improvement. Health system authorities must take responsibility for issuing strategic plans as well as standards, guidelines, and procedures to improve hospital disaster preparedness. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;0:1-7).
    Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness 04/2015; DOI:10.1017/dmp.2015.30 · 1.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Naturally occurring and man-made disasters have been increasing in the world, including Europe, over the past several decades. Health systems are a key part of any community disaster management system. The success of preparedness and prevention depends on the success of activities such as disaster planning, organization and training. The aim of this study is to evaluate health system preparedness for disasters in the 27 European Union member countries. A cross-sectional analysis study was completed between June-September 2012. The checklist used for this survey was a modified from the World Health Organization toolkit for assessing health-system capacity for crisis management. Three specialists from each of the 27 European Union countries were included in the survey. Responses to each survey question were scored and the range of preparedness level was defined as 0-100%, categorized in three levels as follows: Acceptable; Transitional; or Insufficient. Response rate was 79.1%. The average level of disaster management preparedness in the health systems of 27 European Union member states was 68% (Acceptable). The highest level of preparedness was seen in the United Kingdom, Luxemburg, and Lithuania. Considering the elements of disaster management system, the highest level of preparedness score was at health information elements (86%), and the lowest level was for hospitals, and educational elements (54%). This survey study suggests that preparedness level of European Union countries in 2012 is at an acceptable level but could be improved. Elements such as hospitals and education and training suffer from insufficient levels of preparedness. The European Union health systems need a collective strategic plan, as well as enough resources, to establish a comprehensive and standardized disaster management strategy plan. A competency based training curriculum for managers and first responders is basic to accomplishing this goal. Disaster medicine; Disaster preparedness; Disaster epidemiology; Health systems; European Union.