Literature DB >> 15748010

The incident command system in disasters: evaluation methods for a hospital-based exercise.

Tamara L Thomas1, Edbert B Hsu, Hong K Kim, Sara Colli, Guillermo Arana, Gary B Green.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: No universally accepted methods for objective evaluation of the function of the Incident Command System (ICS) in disaster exercises currently exist. An ICS evaluation method for disaster simulations was derived and piloted.
METHODS: A comprehensive variable list for ICS function was created and four distinct ICS evaluation methods (quantitative and qualitative) were derived and piloted prospectively during an exercise. Delay times for key provider-victim interactions were recorded through a system of data collection using participant- and observer-based instruments. Two different post-exercise surveys (commanders, other participants) were used to assess knowledge and perceptions of assigned roles, organization, and communications. Direct observation by trained observers and a structured debriefing session also were employed.
RESULTS: A total of 45 volunteers participated in the exercise that included 20 mock victims. First, mean, and last victim delay times (from exercise initiation) were 2.1, 4.0, and 9.3 minutes (min) until triage, and 5.2, 11.9, and 22.0 min for scene evacuation, respectively. First, mean, and last victim delay times to definitive treatment were 6.0, 14.5, and 25.0 min. Mean time to triage (and range) for scene Zones I (nearest entrance), II (intermediate) and III (ground zero) were 2.9 (2.0-4.0), 4.1 (3.0-5.0) and 5.2 (3.0-9.0) min, respectively. The lowest acuity level (Green) victims had the shortest mean times for triage (3.5 min), evacuation (4.0 min), and treatment (10.0 min) while the highest acuity level (Red) victims had the longest mean times for all measures; patterns consistent with independent rather than ICS-directed rescuer activities. Specific ICS problem areas were identified.
CONCLUSIONS: A structured, objective, quantitative evaluation of ICS function can identify deficiencies that can become the focus for subsequent improvement efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15748010     DOI: 10.1017/s1049023x00002090

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prehosp Disaster Med        ISSN: 1049-023X            Impact factor:   2.040


  6 in total

1.  Portable ultrasonography in mass casualty incidents: The CAVEAT examination.

Authors:  Stanislaw Peter Stawicki; James M Howard; John P Pryor; David P Bahner; Melissa L Whitmill; Anthony J Dean
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2010-11-18

2.  Hospital Incident Command System (HICS) performance in Iran; decision making during disasters.

Authors:  Ahmadreza Djalali; Maaret Castren; Vahid Hosseinijenab; Mahmoud Khatib; Gunnar Ohlen; Lisa Kurland
Journal:  Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med       Date:  2012-02-06       Impact factor: 2.953

Review 3.  Benefits, barriers, and limitations on the use of Hospital Incident Command System.

Authors:  Shahin Shooshtari; Shahram Tofighi; Shirin Abbasi
Journal:  J Res Med Sci       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 1.852

Review 4.  Factors Affecting the Effectiveness of Hospital Incident Command System; Findings from a Systematic Review.

Authors:  Paria Bahrami; Ali Ardalan; Amir Nejati; Abbas Ostadtaghizadeh; Arezoo Yari
Journal:  Bull Emerg Trauma       Date:  2020-04

Review 5.  Clinical review: the role of the intensive care physician in mass casualty incidents: planning, organisation, and leadership.

Authors:  Peter J Shirley; Gerlinde Mandersloot
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2008-05-14       Impact factor: 9.097

6.  Meta-evaluation of published studies on evaluation of health disaster preparedness exercises through a systematic review.

Authors:  Hojjat Sheikhbardsiri; Mohammad H Yarmohammadian; Hamid Reza Khankeh; Mahmoud Nekoei-Moghadam; Ahmad Reza Raeisi
Journal:  J Educ Health Promot       Date:  2018-01-10
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.