Article

Assessing hospital disaster preparedness: a comparison of an on-site survey, directly observed drill performance, and video analysis of teamwork.

Department of Emergency Medicine, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Annals of emergency medicine (Impact Factor: 4.33). 02/2008; 52(3):195-201, 201.e1-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.10.026
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT There is currently no validated method for assessing hospital disaster preparedness. We determine the degree of correlation between the results of 3 methods for assessing hospital disaster preparedness: administration of an on-site survey, drill observation using a structured evaluation tool, and video analysis of team performance in the hospital incident command center.
This was a prospective, observational study conducted during a regional disaster drill, comparing the results from an on-site survey, a structured disaster drill evaluation tool, and a video analysis of teamwork, performed at 6 911-receiving hospitals in Los Angeles County, CA. The on-site survey was conducted separately from the drill and assessed hospital disaster plan structure, vendor agreements, modes of communication, medical and surgical supplies, involvement of law enforcement, mutual aid agreements with other facilities, drills and training, surge capacity, decontamination capability, and pharmaceutical stockpiles. The drill evaluation tool, developed by Johns Hopkins University under contract from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, was used to assess various aspects of drill performance, such as the availability of the hospital disaster plan, the geographic configuration of the incident command center, whether drill participants were identifiable, whether the noise level interfered with effective communication, and how often key information (eg, number of available staffed floor, intensive care, and isolation beds; number of arriving victims; expected triage level of victims; number of potential discharges) was received by the incident command center. Teamwork behaviors in the incident command center were quantitatively assessed, using the MedTeams analysis of the video recordings obtained during the disaster drill. Spearman rank correlations of the results between pair-wise groupings of the 3 assessment methods were calculated.
The 3 evaluation methods demonstrated qualitatively different results with respect to each hospital's level of disaster preparedness. The Spearman rank correlation coefficient between the results of the on-site survey and the video analysis of teamwork was -0.34; between the results of the on-site survey and the structured drill evaluation tool, 0.15; and between the results of the video analysis and the drill evaluation tool, 0.82.
The disparate results obtained from the 3 methods suggest that each measures distinct aspects of disaster preparedness, and perhaps no single method adequately characterizes overall hospital preparedness.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
123 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction The assessment of hospital disaster preparedness and response performance is a way to find and remove possible gaps and weaknesses in hospital disaster management effectiveness. The aim of this pilot study was to test the association between the level of preparedness and the level of response performance during a full-scale hospital exercise.
    Prehospital and disaster medicine: the official journal of the National Association of EMS Physicians and the World Association for Emergency and Disaster Medicine in association with the Acute Care Foundation 08/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: IntroductionPaediatric Emergency Departments (PED) should have written disaster plans, to ensure a rapid and efficient response.Objectives1) to determine if Spanish PED have written disaster plans, 2) to describe the characteristics of these plans, and 3) if paediatric victims were included in them.Material and methodsDescriptive multicentre study based on questionnaires sent to physicians in charge of different Spanish PED. The structured survey included questions about external emergency plans (EEP) and internal emergency plans (IEP).ResultsTwenty-five out of 44 surveys were replied. Eighteen PED had an EEP, most of them had been written 10 years ago and were reviewed every 3 years or more. In 11/18 PED, the EEP was well-known by health care providers. Drills were never performed in 13/18 PED. Twenty-one PED had an IEP, most of them had been written 8 years ago and were reviewed every 3 years or more. In 13/21 PED, IEP was well-known by health care providers but drills were never performed in 12/21 PED. IEP included evacuation plans (22), fire emergency plans (19), bomb threat plan (13) and flood plans (9). Nine PED have paediatric-specific disaster plans and in 7 PED, disaster plans included adult and paediatric victims. Children were not included In 1 EEP and in 5 IEP.Conclusions Most of PED have written disaster plans, but these plans are old, unknown by health care providers and almost half of them do not include paediatric victims. It is necessary to improve disaster planning in Spanish PED.
    Anales de Pediatría. 09/2012; 77(3):158–164.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this report is to identify from the literature common themes relating to the concept of hospital preparedness for emergencies to develop an agreed framework for evaluation. A systematic literature search identified appropriate articles for critical appraisal. A meta-ethnography approach was used to synthesize the findings, using both reciprocal translation and line-of-argument synthesis. From an initial 2162 articles, we identified 13 articles that specifically addressed the aims of this review and formed the basis of the intended analysis. Hospital emergency preparedness is essential for effective disaster relief. Developing a systematic and structured methodology is necessary to assess hospital preparedness. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness: 2014:0:1-9).
    Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness 03/2014; · 1.14 Impact Factor