Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine
-
The 2006 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference discussed key concepts within the field of surge capacity. Within the breakout session on research priorities, experts in disaster medicine and other related fields used a structured nominal-group process to delineate five critical areas of research. Of the 14 potential areas of discovery identified by the group, the top five were the following: 1) defining criteria and methods for decision making regarding allocation of scarce resources, 2) determining effective triage protocols, 3) determining key decision makers for surge-capacity planning and means to evaluate response efficacy (e.g., incident command), 4) developing effective communication and information-sharing strategies (situational awareness) for public-health decision support, and 5) developing methods and evaluations for meeting workforce needs. Five working groups were formed to consider the above areas and to devise sample research questions that were refined further by the entire group of participants.
-
Metrics are the driver to positive change toward better patient care. However, the research into the metrics of the science of surge is incomplete, research funding is inadequate, and we lack a criterion standard metric for identifying and quantifying surge capacity. Therefore, a consensus working group was formed through a "viral invitation" process. ⋯ These statements emphasize the importance of funded research in the area of surge capacity metrics; the utility of an emergency medicine research registry; the need to make the data available to clinicians, administrators, public health officials, and internal and external systems; the importance of real-time data, data standards, and electronic transmission; seamless integration of data capture into the care process; the value of having data available from a single point of access through which data mining, forecasting, and modeling can be performed; and the basic necessity of a criterion standard metric for quantifying surge capacity. Further consensus work is needed to select a criterion standard metric for quantifying surge capacity. These consensus statements cover the future research needs, the infrastructure needs, and the data that are needed for a state-of-the-art approach to surge and surge capacity.
-
High-consequence surge research involves a systems approach that includes elements such as healthcare facilities, out-of-hospital systems, mortuary services, public health, and sheltering. This article focuses on one aspect of this research, hospital surge capacity, and discusses a definition for such capacity, its components, and future considerations. While conceptual definitions of surge capacity exist, evidence-based practical guidelines for hospitals require enhancement. ⋯ Studies identifying strategies for hospitals to enhance these components and estimates of how long it will take are lacking. One system for augmenting hospital staff, the Emergency System for Advance Registration of Volunteer Health Professionals, is a consensus-derived plan that has never been tested. Future challenges include developing strategies to handle the two different types of high-consequence surge events: 1) a focal, time-limited event (such as an earthquake) where outside resources exist and can be mobilized to assist those in need and 2) a widespread, prolonged event (such as pandemic influenza) where all resources will be in use and rationing or triage is needed.
-
To review the current literature on the effects of ambulance diversion (AD). ⋯ Despite its common use, there is a relative paucity of studies on the effects of AD. Further research into these effects should be performed so that we may understand the role of AD in the health system.
-
To describe the characteristics of the demand for medical care during sudden-impact disasters, focusing on local U.S. communities and the initial phases of sudden-impact disasters. ⋯ As part of planning for sudden-impact disasters, communities should be expected to sustain medical services for 24 hours, and up to 96, before arrival of external resources. For effective medical surge-capacity response during sudden-impact disasters, there should be a priority for emergency medical care with a focus on ambulatory injuries and illnesses.