Literature DB >> 33752618

Lessons learned from reviewing a hospital's disaster response to the hydrofluoric acid leak in Gumi city in 2012.

Heejun Shin1,2, Se Kwang Oh3,4, Han You Lee3,5, Heajin Chung3,6, Seong Yong Yoon7, Sung Yong Choi3, Jae Hyuk Kim8.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study analyzed the characteristics of hydrogen fluoride-exposed patients (HFEPs) treated in the emergency department (ED) of a local university hospital, and reviewed the hospital's disaster response according to space, staff, supplies, and systems (4Ss).
METHODS: This retrospective observational chart review and descriptive study included 199 HFEPs among 2588 total ED patients who visited a local university emergency medical center for treatment between September 27, 2012 and October 20, 2012, following a hydrofluoric acid leak at the Hube Globe factory in Gumi City, Republic of Korea. Descriptive results concerning the 4Ss were obtained by interviewing ED specialist staff physicians on duty during the study period. In accordance with American Burn Association criteria, patients requiring burn center referral were assigned to the major burn group (MBG) as severe condition.
RESULTS: During the acute phase (within 8 h after leak initiation), there were 43 patients in the ED, which was staffed with 3 doctors and 3 nurses, without 4S resources. Of these 43 patients, there were 8 HFEPs (100%) in the MBG and 0 in the non-MBG (NMBG). During the subacute phase (24 h after the acute phase), there were 262 patients in the ED including 167 HFEPs, of whom 45 (26.95%) were in the MBG and 122 (73.05%) were in the NMBG. The ED was then staffed with 6 doctors (3 on day shift and 3 on night shift) and 10 nurses (3 on day shift, 4 on evening shift, and 3 on night shift), and no 4S resources were available. Throughout the study period, no 4Ss were available. First, there was no expansion of ED space or secured disaster reserve beds. Second, there was no increase in manpower with duty time adjustments or duty relocation for ED working personnel. Third, there was no logistics reinforcement (e.g., antidote or personal protective equipment). Fourth, there were no disaster-related measures for the administration department, decontamination zone setup, safety diagnostic testing, or designated disaster triage implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: The hospital's disaster response was insufficient for all aspects of the 4Ss. Detailed guidance concerning a hospital disaster management plan is required.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disasters; Hydrogen fluoride; Review; Surge capacity

Year:  2021        PMID: 33752618      PMCID: PMC7986510          DOI: 10.1186/s12873-021-00427-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Emerg Med        ISSN: 1471-227X


  29 in total

Review 1.  Development of hospital disaster resilience: conceptual framework and potential measurement.

Authors:  Shuang Zhong; Michele Clark; Xiang-Yu Hou; Yu-Li Zang; Gerard Fitzgerald
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 2.740

Review 2.  Chemical burns: pathophysiology and treatment.

Authors:  R Palao; I Monge; M Ruiz; J P Barret
Journal:  Burns       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 2.744

3.  Strengthening hazard vulnerability analysis: results of recent research in Maine.

Authors:  Paul Campbell; Steven J Trockman; Amanda R Walker
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2011 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

Review 4.  Preparing Emergency Physicians for Acute Disaster Response: A Review of Current Training Opportunities in the US.

Authors:  Bhakti Hansoti; Dylan S Kellogg; Sara J Aberle; Morgan C Broccoli; Jeffrey Feden; Arthur French; Charles M Little; Brooks Moore; Joseph Sabato; Tara Sheets; R Weinberg; Pat Elmes; Christopher Kang
Journal:  Prehosp Disaster Med       Date:  2016-09-19       Impact factor: 2.040

5.  Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Science and the CBRNE Science Medical Operations Science Support Expert (CMOSSE).

Authors:  C Norman Coleman; Judith L Bader; John F Koerner; Chad Hrdina; Kenneth D Cliffer; John L Hick; James J James; Monique K Mansoura; Alicia A Livinski; Scott V Nystrom; Andrea DiCarlo-Cohen; Maria Julia Marinissen; Lynne Wathen; Jessica M Appler; Brooke Buddemeier; Rocco Casagrande; Derek Estes; Patrick Byrne; Edward M Kennedy; Ann A Jakubowski; Cullen Case; David M Weinstock; Nicholas Dainiak; Dan Hanfling; Andrew L Garrett; Natalie N Grant; Daniel Dodgen; Irwin Redlener; Thomas F MacKAY; Meghan Treber; Mary J Homer; Tammy P Taylor; Aubrey Miller; George Korch; Richard Hatchett
Journal:  Disaster Med Public Health Prep       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 1.385

6.  Swift and Low-Cost Surge in Chemical Threat Response: Is It Possible? The Experience of a French Hospital.

Authors:  Albert Brizio; Jean-Christophe Hubert; Brigitte Hennequin; Jeremy Bouchez; Marie-Clément Kouka
Journal:  Disaster Med Public Health Prep       Date:  2018-02-21       Impact factor: 1.385

Review 7.  Allocating scarce resources in disasters: emergency department principles.

Authors:  John L Hick; Dan Hanfling; Stephen V Cantrill
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2011-08-19       Impact factor: 5.721

8.  Principles of Emergency Department facility design for optimal management of mass-casualty incidents.

Authors:  Pinchas Halpern; Scott A Goldberg; Jimmy G Keng; Kristi L Koenig
Journal:  Prehosp Disaster Med       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 2.040

Review 9.  Hydrofluoric Acid: Burns and Systemic Toxicity, Protective Measures, Immediate and Hospital Medical Treatment.

Authors:  Emilija Bajraktarova-Valjakova; Vesna Korunoska-Stevkovska; Silvana Georgieva; Kiro Ivanovski; Cvetanka Bajraktarova-Misevska; Aneta Mijoska; Anita Grozdanov
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2018-11-20

10.  Acute symptoms after a community hydrogen fluoride spill.

Authors:  Joo-Yong Na; Kuck-Hyun Woo; Seong-Yong Yoon; Seong-Yong Cho; In-Ung Song; Joo-An Kim; Jin-Seok Kim
Journal:  Ann Occup Environ Med       Date:  2013-09-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.