PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 17069340

Pandemic planning.

Abstract

Recent trends of hospital ED overcrowding, ambulance diversion and the persistent "dire straits" of emergency medical systems can be expected to be exacerbated under the conditions a pandemic influenza will present. Partners of community healthcare systems must come together to solve these problems as they develop their pandemic influenza response plans. The solution must involve EMS, hospitals, public health and other healthcare partners, as well as local government. Limited surge capacity, overwhelming numbers of citizens requiring and demanding care, and the worried well will simply compound the challenges EMS responders will face. EMS must get proactive and tap the preparedness resources being marshaled at federal, state and local levels. These preparations will not be complete without an exercise that probes for weaknesses in the response plan. EMS agencies are encouraged to join up with other components of the healthcare system, such as hospitals, community health centers and public health, and conduct joint exercises. And we must not forget the coroners, whose plans must include a mass-fatality plan that details the management of what may become an overwhelming number of deceased.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Tom Russo. 2006. Pandemic planning.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17069340/

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↗