PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11367943

Ethics and triage.

Abstract

A disaster is characterized by an imbalance between needs and supplies. In circumstances in which there occur mass casualties, it is not possible to provide care for all of the victims. Thus, it may be necessary to triage the casualties according to pre-established priorities. The performance of triage is associated with many ethical issues. Currently, no Europe-wide agreement on triage and ethics exists. One system based on a categorization into four groups is proposed. Triage should be avoided whenever possible, but, when it is required, there is an obligation to respect human rights and the humanitarian laws, especially with reference to the Geneva Convention of 1864 and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948. The condition of informed consent must be followed, even in mass casualty situations. Triage always must follow established medical criteria and cannot be based on any other principles. Triage implies constant re-evaluation of victims as conditions of the victims and of available resources change continuously. In order to facilitate international coordination and cooperation, a universal classification system must be adopted.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B Domres, M Koch, A Manger, H D Becker. Ethics and triage.. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1049023x00025590

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Evaluation of two commercially available portal monitors for emergency response.

The Human Monitoring Laboratory has compared two types (the P3 and the MiniSentry) of portal monitors that can be field deployed in response to an emergency. They can be used to screen persons for internal or external radioactive contamination by fission activation products (neither unit is capable of detecting alpha or beta radiation, and the amount of material required to alarm the monitors is unacceptably high for low energy x rays or gamma rays) following an incident involving the release of radioactive material (accidental or intentional). It was found that the P3 benefits from simplicity but requires slightly more activity to alarm than the MiniSentry, although for emergency response, the amount of activity that can be detected is far below a level where significant health effects will occur. The MiniSentry was found to have more capability than the P3, but these benefits also bring their own disadvantages. It was also found that the MiniSentry would be difficult to deploy in an outdoor setting whereas the P3 is well designed for a field setting. Despite the differences found, the HML has concluded that both have a distinct place in emergency monitoring. In the future, the HML plans to have both instruments ready for field deployment.

Disaster Planning↗