C Norman Coleman1,2, Kenneth D Cliffer1, Andrea L DiCarlo3, Mary J Homer1, Brian R Moyer1, Shannon G Loelius1, Adam W Tewell1, Judith L Bader1, John F Koerner1. 1. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Washington, DC, USA. 2. Radiation Research Program, Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD, USA. 3. Radiation and Nuclear Countermeasures Program, Division of Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, MD, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: An effective response for a mass-casualty incident requires understanding the relevant basic science and physical impact; detailed preparedness among jurisdictions; and clear, sequential response planning, including formal operational exercises, logistics, interagency, and public-private coordination, rapid activation of resilience, and continual improvement from lessons learned and new knowledge. This ConRad 2021 meeting report describes steps for civilian medical and public health response planning for a nuclear detonation; the utility of this type of planning for broader application; and extension of this planning to the international community. CONCLUSION: A nuclear detonation requires a response within minutes to what will be a large-scale disaster complicated by radiation, including some elements that are similar to a broad range of incidents. The response could be further complicated if multiple incidents occur simultaneously. Required are detailed planning, preparedness and scripting for an immediate operational response, addressing clinical manifestations of evolving radiation illness, and flexibility to adapt to a rapidly changing situation. This need translates into the use of just-in-time information; effective, credible communication; situational awareness on a global scale; and a template upon which to apply capabilities in a multi-sector response. This effort is greatly facilitated using a 'playbook' approach, the basics of which are presented.
PURPOSE: An effective response for a mass-casualty incident requires understanding the relevant basic science and physical impact; detailed preparedness among jurisdictions; and clear, sequential response planning, including formal operational exercises, logistics, interagency, and public-private coordination, rapid activation of resilience, and continual improvement from lessons learned and new knowledge. This ConRad 2021 meeting report describes steps for civilian medical and public health response planning for a nuclear detonation; the utility of this type of planning for broader application; and extension of this planning to the international community. CONCLUSION: A nuclear detonation requires a response within minutes to what will be a large-scale disaster complicated by radiation, including some elements that are similar to a broad range of incidents. The response could be further complicated if multiple incidents occur simultaneously. Required are detailed planning, preparedness and scripting for an immediate operational response, addressing clinical manifestations of evolving radiation illness, and flexibility to adapt to a rapidly changing situation. This need translates into the use of just-in-time information; effective, credible communication; situational awareness on a global scale; and a template upon which to apply capabilities in a multi-sector response. This effort is greatly facilitated using a 'playbook' approach, the basics of which are presented.
Authors: C Norman Coleman; Chad Hrdina; Judith L Bader; Ann Norwood; Robert Hayhurst; Joseph Forsha; Kevin Yeskey; Ann Knebel Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2008-04-03 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: C Norman Coleman; Ann R Knebel; John L Hick; David M Weinstock; Rocco Casagrande; J Jaime Caro; Evan G DeRenzo; Daniel Dodgen; Ann E Norwood; Susan E Sherman; Kenneth D Cliffer; Richard McNally; Judith L Bader; Paula Murrain-Hill Journal: Disaster Med Public Health Prep Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 1.385
Authors: Ann R Knebel; C Norman Coleman; Kenneth D Cliffer; Paula Murrain-Hill; Richard McNally; Victor Oancea; Jimmie Jacobs; Brooke Buddemeier; John L Hick; David M Weinstock; Chad M Hrdina; Tammy Taylor; Marianne Matzo; Judith L Bader; Alicia A Livinski; Gerald Parker; Kevin Yeskey Journal: Disaster Med Public Health Prep Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 1.385
Authors: Paula Murrain-Hill; C Norman Coleman; John L Hick; Irwin Redlener; David M Weinstock; John F Koerner; Delaine Black; Melissa Sanders; Judith L Bader; Joseph Forsha; Ann R Knebel Journal: Disaster Med Public Health Prep Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 1.385
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
Authors: C Norman Coleman; Julie M Sullivan; Judith L Bader; Paula Murrain-Hill; John F Koerner; Andrew L Garrett; David M Weinstock; Cullen Case; Chad Hrdina; Steven A Adams; Robert C Whitcomb; Ellie Graeden; Robert Shankman; Timothy Lant; Bert W Maidment; Richard C Hatchett Journal: Health Phys Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 1.316
Authors: David M Weinstock; Cullen Case; Judith L Bader; Nelson J Chao; C Norman Coleman; Richard J Hatchett; Daniel J Weisdorf; Dennis L Confer Journal: Blood Date: 2008-02-20 Impact factor: 22.113