Health care providers face multiple difficulties in providing care to a disaster-stricken community. Training, preparation, and a good attitude are important, as is adequate logistical support. An often-ignored issue is the difficulty encountered with language barriers during a response, and how using interpreters affects the quality and impact of the health care provided. This article reviews the use of interpreters and focuses on how they may affect an international health care response.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:159–163)

In response to the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, public health authorities launched an ambitious vaccination program to protect tens of millions of Americans from the virus. In April and May 2010, the Institute of Medicine Forum on Medical and Public Health Preparedness for Catastrophic Events hosted a series of 3 regional workshops to examine the 2009 H1N1 vaccination campaign. The workshops brought together stakeholders involved in distributing and dispensing H1N1 vaccine to discuss successes and challenges and to identify strategies to improve future vaccination programs and other medical countermeasure dispensing campaigns. On the basis of the presentations and the discussions that followed, several themes and opportunities for future efforts were identified in the following areas: vaccine supply and demand; state and local implementation of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations, including prioritization for vaccination; vaccine formulations and priority groups; opportunities for developing partnerships; opportunities to increase seasonal vaccination rates among pregnant women and health care workers and to increase acceptance of live attenuated nasal spray vaccine; standardization and improvement of immunization information management systems; opportunities to simplify, systematize, and automate processes and practices; and research needs and opportunities.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:81-86)

Similar to the triaging of patients by health care workers, legal and public health professionals must prioritize and respond to issues of law and ethics in declared public health emergencies. As revealed by the 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza outbreak and other events, there are considerable inconsistencies among professionals regarding how to best approach these issues during a public health emergency. Our project explores these inconsistencies by attempting to assess how practitioners make legal and ethical decisions in real-time emergencies to further critical public health objectives. Using a fictitious scenario and interactive visualization environment, we observed real-time decision-making processes among knowledgeable participants. Although participants' decisions and perspectives varied, the exercise demonstrated an increase in the perception of the relevance of legal preparedness in multiple aspects of the decision-making process and some key lessons learned for consideration in future repetitions of the exercise and actual, real-time emergency events.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S242-S251)

Background: Prior assessments of public health readiness had identified gaps in radiation preparedness. In recent years, preparedness planning has involved an “all-hazards” approach. Current assessment of the national status related to radiation public health emergency preparedness capabilities at the state and local health department levels was needed.

Methods: A survey of state health departments related to radiation readiness was undertaken in 2010 by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). States with nuclear power plants were instructed to consider their responses exclusive of capabilities and resources related to the plants given that the emergency response plans for nuclear power plants are specific and unique.

Results: Thirty-eight (76%) state health departments responded to the survey, including 26 of the 31 states with nuclear power plants. Specific strengths noted at the state level included that the majority of states had a written radiation response plan and most plans include a detailed section for communications issues during a radiation emergency. In addition, more than half of the states indicated that their relationship with federal partners is sufficient to provide resources for radiation emergencies, indicating the importance states placed on federal resources and expertise. Specific weaknesses are discussed and include that most states had completed little to no planning for public health surveillance to assess potential human health impacts of a radiation event; less than half had written plans to address exposure assessment, environmental sampling, human specimen collection and analysis, and human health assessment. Few reported having sufficient resources to do public health surveillance, radiation exposure assessment, laboratory functions and other capabilities.

Discussion: Levels of planning, resources and partnerships varied among states, those with nuclear power plants were better prepared. Gaps were evident in all states; however and additional training and resources are needed to ensure adequate levels of preparedness.

Conclusion: Overall results of this assessment indicate that in most measures of public health capacity and capability, states are poorly prepared to adequately respond to a major radiation emergency event. Specific recommendations are noted in the discussion.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S134-S142)

Background: The objective of the study was to model urban evacuation into surrounding communities after the detonation of an improvised nuclear device (IND) to assist rural and suburban planners in understanding and effectively planning to address the effects of population surges.

Methods: Researchers developed parameters for how far evacuees would travel to escape disasters and factors that would influence choice of destination from studies of historical evacuations, surveys of citizens' evacuation intentions in hypothetical disasters, and semistructured interviews with key informants and emergency preparedness experts. Those parameters became the inputs to a “push-pull” model of how many people would flee in the 4 scenarios and where they would go.

Results: The expanded model predicted significant population movements from the New York City borough of Manhattan and counties within 20 km of Manhattan to counties within a 150-mi radius of the assumed IND detonation. It also predicted that even in some communities located far from Manhattan, arriving evacuees would increase the population needing services by 50% to 150%.

Conclusions: The results suggest that suburban and rural communities could be overwhelmed by evacuees from their center city following an IND detonation. They also highlight the urgency of educating and communicating with the public about radiation hazards to mitigate panic and hysteria, anticipating the ways in which a mass exodus may disrupt or even cripple rescue and response efforts, and devising creative ways to exercise and drill for an event about which there is great denial and fatalism.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S143-S150)

Radiological terrorism has been recognized as a probable scenario with high impact. Radiological preparedness planning at the federal and state levels has been encouraging, but translating complex doctrines into operational readiness at the local level has proved challenging. Based on the authors' experience with radiological response planning for the City of Baltimore, this article describes an integrated approach to municipal-level radiological emergency preparedness planning, provides information on resources that are useful for radiological preparedness planning, and recommends a step-by-step process toward developing the plan with relevant examples from the experience in Baltimore. Local governmental agencies constitute the first line of response and are critical to the success of the operation. This article is intended as a starting framework for local governmental efforts toward developing a response plan for radiological incidents in their communities.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S151-S158)