Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T18:52:53.819Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Volendam Fire: Lessons Learned from Disaster Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Sabine M.van Harten ,
Joost J.L.M. Bierens ,
Lieke Welling ,
Peter Patka ,
Robert W. Kreis  and
Maarten Boers
Sabine M.van Harten*
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Zaans Medical Center, Zaandam, the Netherlands
Joost J.L.M. Bierens
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Lieke Welling
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Peter Patka
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Robert W. Kreis
Affiliation:
Burns Centre, Red Cross Hospital, Beverwijk, the Netherlands
Maarten Boers
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands
*
Zaans Medical Center Department of Surgery Koningin Julianaplein 581502 DV Zaandam The Netherlands E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

After the Volendam fire, a multidisciplinary, integral evaluation, called the Medical Evaluation of the Disaster in Volendam (MERV), was established. This article is a discussion of disaster research methodology. It describes the organizational framework of this project and the methodological problems.

Methods:

A scientific steering group consisting of members from three hospitals prepared and guided the project. A research team wrote the final study protocol and performed the study. The project was funded by the Ministry of Health. The study protocol had a modular design in which each of the modules focused on one specific area or location. The main questions for each location were: (1) which treatment protocols were used; (2)what was the condition of the patient; and (3) was medical care provided according to existing protocols. After the fire, 241 victims were treated in hospitals; they all were included in the study. Most of the victims had burn injuries, and approximately one-third suffered from inhalation injury. All hospitals and ambulance services involved were visited in order to collect data, and interviewers obtained additional information. The government helped obtain permission for data-collection in three of the hospitals. Over 1,200 items of information about each patient and >200,000 total items were collected. During data processing, the data were re-organized, categorized, and presented in a uniform and consistent style. A cross-sectional site analysis and a longitudinal patient analysis were conducted. This was facilitated by the use of several sub-data-bases. The modular approach made it possible to obtain a complete overview of the medical care provided. The project team was guided by a multidisciplinary steering group and the research was performed by a research team. This enabled the research team to focus on the scientific aspects.

Conclusion:

The evaluation of the Volendam fire indicates that a project approach with a modular design is effective for the analysis of complex incidents. The use of several sub-databases makes it easy to combine findings and conduct cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. The government played an important role in the funding and support of the project. To limit and structure data collection and analysis, a pilot study based on several predefined main questions should be conducted. The questions then can be specified further based on the availability of data.

Keywords

burnsdesigndisasterevaluationfireframeworkinhalation injurymedicalcaremethodologyprotocolsresearchVolendam
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 21 , Issue 5 , October 2006 , pp. 303 - 309
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Sundnes, KO, Birnbaum, ML (eds): Health Disaster Management Guidelines for Evaluation and Research in the Utstein Style. Prehosp Disast Med 2003;17(3):Supplement.Google Scholar
2.Ricci, E, Pretto, E: Assessment of prehospital and hospital resonse in disaster. Crit Care Clin 1991;7:471–484.Google Scholar
3.Quick, G: A paradigm for multidisciplinary disaster research: The Oklahoma City experience. J Emer Med 1998;16:621–630.Google Scholar
4. Commissie Onderzoek Cafébrand Nieuwjaarsnacht (Commissie Alders): Cafebrand Nieuwjaarsnacht Eindrapport. Deen Haag, 2001.Google Scholar
5. Australia and New Zealand Burn Association: Emergency Management of Severe Burns (EMSB) Course Manual. NL versie 01/09 edn. 1996.Google Scholar
6. Stuurgroep Medische Evaluatie Ramp Volendam: Medish Rapport Cafébrand Volendam 2001. 2003.Google Scholar
7. Stuurgroep Medische Evaluatie Ramp Volendam: Medish Rapport Cafébrand Volendam 2001 (Fase 2). 2004.Google Scholar
8.Welling, L, van Harten, SM, Patka, P et al. : The cafe fire on New Year's Eve in Volendam, the Netherlands: Description of events.Burns 2005;31:548–554.Google Scholar
9.Welling, L, van Harten, SM, Patka, P et al. : Medical management after indoor fires: A review. Burns 2005;31:673–678.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.van Harten, SM, Welling, L, Perez, SGM et al. : Management ofmultiple burn casualties from the Volendam disaster in the emergency departmens of general hospitals. Eur J Emerg Med 2005;12(6):270–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Welling, L, Perez, SGM, van Harten, SM et al. : Analyis of the pre-event education and subsequent performance of emergency medical responders to the Volendam cafe fire. Eur J Emerg Med 2005;12(6):265–269.Google Scholar
12.Lillibridge, SR, Noji, EK: The importance of medical records in disaster epidemiology research. J AHIMA 1992;63:137–138.Google ScholarPubMed