Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:55:40.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Assessing Hospital Preparedness: Comparison of an On-site Survey with a Self-reported, Internet-based, Long-distance Tabletop Drill

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2013

Walter Valesky ,
Patricia Roblin ,
Brijal Patel ,
John Adelaine ,
Shahriar Zehtabchi  and
Bonnie Arquilla
Walter Valesky
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York USA
Patricia Roblin
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York USA
Brijal Patel
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, George Washington University, Washington, D.C. USA
John Adelaine
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York USA
Shahriar Zehtabchi
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York USA
Bonnie Arquilla*
Affiliation:
Department of Emergency Medicine, State University of New York Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York USA
*
Correspondence: Bonnie Arquilla, DO Department of Emergency Medicine State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn Box 1260 440 Lenox Road Brooklyn, New York 11203 USA E-mail [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Methods of defining hospital disaster preparedness are poorly defined in the literature, leaving wide discrepancies between a hospital's self-reported preparedness and that assessed by an objective reviewer.

Objectives

This study compared self-reported surge capacity data from individual hospitals, obtained from a previously reported long-distance tabletop drill (LDTT) prior to the 2010 FIFA World Cup tournament in Cape Town, South Africa, with surge capacity data assessed by an on-site survey inspection team.

Methods

In this prospective, observational study, contact persons used in the prior LDTT assessing hospital disaster preparedness in the lead-up to the 2010 FIFA World Cup made surge capacity assessments (licensed bed capacity plus surge capacity beds) for the respiratory intensive care unit (RICU), neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), medical intensive care unit (MICU), and general medical/surgical beds in each hospital. Following the 2010 World Cup, this data was then re-evaluated by an on-site survey team consisting of two of the authors.

Results

The contact persons for the individual hospitals from the LDTT underreported their individual hospital's surge capacity in 86% (95% CI, 46%-99%) of RICU beds; 100% (95% CI, 63%-100%) of MICU beds; 75% (95% CI, 40%-94%) of NICU beds; and 71% (95% CI, 35%-92%) of medical/surgical beds compared with the on-site inspection team.

Conclusions

The contact persons for the LDTT overwhelmingly underreported surge capacity beds compared with the surge capacity determined by the on-site inspection team.

ValeskyW, RoblinP, PatelB, AdelaineJ, ZehtabchiS, ArquillaB. Assessing Hospital Preparedness: Comparison of an On-site Survey with a Self-reported, Internet-based, Long-distance Tabletop Drill. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(4):1-4.

Keywords

disaster medicinemass-casualty eventpreparednesssurge capacity
Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 28 , Issue 5 , October 2013 , pp. 441 - 444
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2013 

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.Auf der Heide, E. The importance of evidence-based disaster planning. Ann Emerg Med. 2006;47(1):34-49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Kaji, A, Langford, V, Lewis, R. Assessing hospital disaster preparedness: a comparison of an on-site survey, directly observed drill performance, and video analysis of teamwork. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;52(3):195-201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Kaji, A, Lewis, R. Assessment of the reliability of the Johns Hopkins/Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality hospital disaster drill evaluation tool. Ann Emerg Med. 2008;52(3):204-210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kaji, AH, Lewis, RJ. Hospital disaster preparedness in Los Angeles County. Acad Emerg Med. 2006;13(11):1198-1203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Kaji, A, Koenig, K, Lewis, R. Current hospital disaster preparedness. JAMA. 2007;298(18):2188-2190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Barbisch, DF, Koenig, KL. Understanding surge capacity: essential elements. Acad Emerg Med. 2006;13(11):1098-1102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.US Government Printing Office. 109th Congress Public Law 417. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-109publ417/html/PLAW-109publ417.htm. Accessed January 19, 2013.Google Scholar
8. US Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response. Hospital Preparedness Program Overview. http://www.phe.gov/Preparedness/planning/hpp/Pages/overview.aspx. Accessed January 19, 2013.Google Scholar
9.ACEP Board of Directors. Health care system surge capacity recognition, preparedness, and response. 2012;59:240-241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Valesky, W, Silverberg, M, Gillett, B, et al. Assessment of hospital disaster preparedness for the 2010 FIFA World Cup using an internet-based, long-distance tabletop drill. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2011;26(3):192-195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed