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)

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)

For efficient and effective medical responses to mass casualty events, detailed advanced planning is required. For federal responders, this is an ongoing responsibility. The US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) prepares playbooks with formal, written plans that are reviewed, updated, and exercised regularly. Recognizing that state and local responders with fewer resources may be helped in creating their own event-specific response plans, subject matter experts from the range of sectors comprising the Scarce Resources for a Nuclear Detonation Project, provided for this first time a state and local planner's playbook template for responding to a nuclear detonation. The playbook elements are adapted from DHHS playbooks with appropriate modification for state and local planners. Individualization by venue is expected, reflecting specific assets, populations, geography, preferences, and expertise. This playbook template is designed to be a practical tool with sufficient background information and options for step-by-step individualized planning and response.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S89-S97)

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)

A nuclear detonation in a US city would have profound psychological, social, and behavioral effects. This article reviews the scientific literature on human responses to radiation incidents and disasters in general, and examines potential behavioral health care provider (BHCP) contributions in the hours and days after a nuclear detonation. In the area directly affected by the blast, the immediate overarching goal of BHCP interventions is the support of lifesaving activities and the prevention of additional casualties from fallout. These interventions include 6 broad categories: promoting appropriate protective actions, discouraging dangerous behaviors, managing patient/survivor flow to facilitate the best use of scarce resources, supporting first responders, assisting with triage, and delivering palliative care when appropriate. At more distant sites, BHCP should work with medical providers to support hospitalized survivors of the detonation. Recommendations are also made on BHCP interventions later in the response phase and during recovery.

(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2011;5:S54-S64)