| Literature DB >> 22969373 |
Ignacio Aedo1, Shuxin Yu, Paloma Díaz, Pablo Acuña, Teresa Onorati.
Abstract
The preparedness phase is crucial in the emergency management process for reaching an adequate level of readiness to react to potential threats and hazards. During this phase, emergency plans are developed to establish, among other procedures, evacuation and emergency escape routes. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) can support and improve these procedures providing appropriate, updated and accessible information to all people in the affected zone. Current emergency management and evacuation systems do not adapt information to the context and the profile of each person, so messages received in the emergency might be useless. In this paper, we propose a set of criteria that ICT-based systems could achieve in order to avoid this problem adapting emergency alerts and evacuation routes to different situations and people. Moreover, in order to prove the applicability of such criteria, we define a mechanism that can be used as a complement of traditional evacuation systems to provide personalized alerts and evacuation routes to all kinds of people during emergency situations in working places. This mechanism is composed by three main components: CAP-ONES for notifying emergency alerts, NERES for defining emergency plans and generating personalized evacuation routes, and iNeres as the interface to receive and visualize these routes on smartphones. The usability and understandability of proposed interface has been assessed through a user study performed in a fire simulation in an indoor environment. This evaluation demonstrated that users considered iNeres easy to understand, to learn and to use, and they also found very innovative the idea to use smartphones as a support for escaping instead of static signals on walls and doors.Entities:
Keywords: alert notification systems; evacuation routes; mobile emergency systems
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22969373 PMCID: PMC3436002 DOI: 10.3390/s120607804
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
List of alert notification systems (Adapted from [12]).
| 3n | Phone, E-mail, Pager, Fax, SMS, PDA | |
| AlertFind | Phone, E-mail, Pager, Fax, SMS, PDA | |
| Arce | Web pages, E-mail | |
| Command Caller | Phone, E-mail, Pager, Fax, SMS, PDA | |
| RapidReach | Phone, Pager, Fax, SMS y E-mail | |
| Sahana | Web pages | |
| Sigame | Web pages | |
| SWN | Phone, E-mail, Pagers, SMS, MMS, VoIP, Skype, Chat y PDAs | |
| WAVES Alerter | Phone, E-mail, Fax, PDA, TDD/TTY |
Analysis of the State-Of-The-Art Systems with our Defined Set of Criteria.
| #1 | no | no | no | no | no |
| #2 | yes | no | yes | yes | yes |
| #3 | yes | yes | yes | no | no |
| #4 | no | no | no | no | no |
| #5 | no | no | no | yes | yes |
| #6 | no | no | no | no | no |
| #7 | yes | yes | yes | no | no |
Figure 1.The system architecture for managing personalized alerts and evacuation routes.
Figure 2.NERES: the evacuation plan data model.
Figure 3.NERES: relationships of the evacuation plan data model with SEMA4A.
Figure 4.Definition of emergency evacuation routes in a particular floor.
Figure 5.iNeres mechanisms for detection of user's current location: (a) Wi-Fi triangulation fingerprinting, (b) pattern recognition, and (c) user input.
Figure 6.iNeres: communication with the Command Post. (a) iNeres tools to communicate with the Command Post. (b) Floor map includes information about emergency situation, affected people location and textual messages.
Figure 7.Potential evacuation routes according to user's location: (a) dangerous area, (b) stairway ending point, and (c) selected route.
Figure 8.iNeres: Multimodal visualization of the evacuation routes. (a) Text-only view. (b) 3D visualization. (c) Map visualization. (d) Augmented Reality view.
Figure 9.Map with the evacuation route provided by iNeres starting from the user's location and the point where user has contacted with the Command Post.
Figure 10.Graphical visualization of results of first part of the questionnaire (Q3).
Statements, mean and standard deviation for the second part of the questionnaire.
| The system was easy to learn (positive) | 2.33 | 1.07 | |
| The system was easy to use (positive) | 2.5 | 1.24 | |
| The terminology and messages used by iNeres were understandable (positive) | 1.58 | 0.79 | |
| The organization of information presented by iNeres was clear (positive) | 2.58 | 1.24 | |
| The system was slow in some stages of usage (inverted) | 2.33 | 1.23 |
Statements, mean and standard deviation for the third part of the questionnaire.
| Do you think that it is easy to complete this task? (positive) | 2.08 | 0.9 | |
| Do you think that the amount of time it took to complete this task is adequate? (positive) | 2.33 | 1.3 |
Figure 11.Graph visualization for results of the 4th part of the questionnaire (Q11, Q12, Q14, Q15).
Statements and results for the fourth part of the questionnaire (Q13).
| Do you think that the services offered by this system are innovative and that most people would find the system useful? | 1.83 | 1.03 |