Simone Dell'Era1, Olivier Hugli2, Fabrice Dami2. 1. 1Faculty of Biology and Medicine,University of Lausanne,Lausanne,Switzerland. 2. 2Emergency Department,University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV),Lausanne,Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of Swiss hospital disaster preparedness in 2016 compared with the 2006 data. METHODS: A questionnaire was addressed in 2016 to all heads responsible for Swiss emergency departments (EDs). RESULTS: Of the 107 hospitals included, 83 (78%) returned the survey. Overall, 76 (92%) hospitals had a plan in case of a mass casualty incident, and 76 (93%) in case of an accident within the hospital itself. There was a lack in preparedness for specific situations: less than a third of hospitals had a specific plan for nuclear/radiological, biological, chemical, and burns (NRBC+B) patients: nuclear/radiological (14; 18%), biological (25; 31%), chemical (27; 34%), and burns (15; 49%), and 48 (61%) of EDs had a decontamination area. Less than a quarter of hospitals had specific plans for the most vulnerable populations during disasters, such as seniors (12; 15%) and children (19; 24%). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of hospitals with a disaster plan has increased since 2006, reaching a level of 92%. The Swiss health care system remains vulnerable to specific threats like NRBC. The lack of national legislation and funds aimed at fostering hospitals' preparedness to disasters may be the root cause to explain the vulnerability of Swiss hospitals regarding disaster medicine. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:433-439).
OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of Swiss hospital disaster preparedness in 2016 compared with the 2006 data. METHODS: A questionnaire was addressed in 2016 to all heads responsible for Swiss emergency departments (EDs). RESULTS: Of the 107 hospitals included, 83 (78%) returned the survey. Overall, 76 (92%) hospitals had a plan in case of a mass casualty incident, and 76 (93%) in case of an accident within the hospital itself. There was a lack in preparedness for specific situations: less than a third of hospitals had a specific plan for nuclear/radiological, biological, chemical, and burns (NRBC+B) patients: nuclear/radiological (14; 18%), biological (25; 31%), chemical (27; 34%), and burns (15; 49%), and 48 (61%) of EDs had a decontamination area. Less than a quarter of hospitals had specific plans for the most vulnerable populations during disasters, such as seniors (12; 15%) and children (19; 24%). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of hospitals with a disaster plan has increased since 2006, reaching a level of 92%. The Swiss health care system remains vulnerable to specific threats like NRBC. The lack of national legislation and funds aimed at fostering hospitals' preparedness to disasters may be the root cause to explain the vulnerability of Swiss hospitals regarding disaster medicine. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:433-439).