6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      State Preparedness for Crisis Standards of Care in the United States: Implications for Emergency Management

      editorial

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          State governments and hospital facilities are often unprepared to handle a complex medical crisis, despite a moral and ethical obligation to be prepared for disaster. The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has drawn attention to the lack of state guidance on how hospitals should provide care in a crisis. When the resources available are insufficient to treat the current patient load, crisis standards of care (CSC) are implemented to provide care to the population in an ethical manner, while maintaining an ability to handle the surge. This Editorial aims to raise awareness concerning a lack of preparedness that calls for immediate correction at the state and local level.

          Analysis of state guidelines for implementation of CSC demonstrates a lack of preparedness, as only five states in the US have appropriately completed necessary plans, despite a clear understanding of the danger. States have a legal responsibility to regulate the medical care within their borders. Failure of hospital facilities to properly prepare for disasters is not a new issue; Hurricane Katrina (2005) demonstrated a lack of planning and coordination. Improving disaster health care readiness in the United States requires states to create new policy and legislative directives for the health care facilities within their respective jurisdictions. Hospitals should have clear directives to prepare for disasters as part of a “duty to care” and to ensure that the necessary planning and supplies are available to their employees.

          Related collections

          Most cited references13

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          A Framework for Rationing Ventilators and Critical Care Beds During the COVID-19 Pandemic

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Ethical Guidance for Disaster Response, Specifically Around Crisis Standards of Care: A Systematic Review

            Background. Terrorism, disease outbreaks, and other natural disasters and mass casualty events have pushed health care and public health systems to identify and refine emergency preparedness protocols for disaster response. Ethical guidance, alongside legal and medical frameworks, are increasingly common components of disaster response plans. Objectives. To systematically review the prevalence and content of ethical guidance offered for disaster response, specifically around crisis standards of care (CSCs). Search methods. We systematically indexed academic literature from PubMed, Google Scholar, and ISI Web of Science from 2012 to 2016. Selection criteria. We searched for peer-reviewed articles that substantively engaged in discussion of ethical guidance for CSCs. Data collection and analysis. Researchers screened potential articles for identification and discussion of ethical issues in CSC planning. We categorized and cataloged ethical concepts and principles. Main results. Of 580 peer-reviewed articles mentioning ethics and CSCs or disaster planning, 38 (6%) met selection criteria. The systematic review of the CSC ethics literature since 2012 showed that authors were primarily focused on the ethical justifications for CSC (n = 20) as well as a need for ethics guidelines for implementing CSCs; the ethical justifications for triage (n = 19), both as to which criteria to use and the appropriate processes by which to employ triage; and international issues (n = 17). In addition to these areas of focus, the scholarly literature included discussion of a number of other ethical issues, including duty to care (n = 11), concepts of a duty to plan (n = 8), utilitarianism (n = 5), moral distress (n = 4), professional norms (n = 3), reciprocity (n = 2), allocation criteria (n = 4), equity (n = 4), research ethics (n = 2), duty to steward resources (n = 2), social utility and social worth (n = 2), and a number of others (n = 20). Although public health preparedness efforts have paid increasing attention to CSCs in recent years, CSC plans have rarely been implemented within the United States to date, although some components are common (e.g., triage is used in US emergency departments regularly). Conversely, countries outside the United States more commonly implement CSCs within a natural disaster or humanitarian crisis response, and may offer significant insight into ethics and disaster response for US-based practitioners. Conclusions. This systematic review identifies the most oft-used and -discussed ethical concepts and principles used in disaster planning around CSCs. Although discussion of more nuanced issues (e.g., health equity) are present, the majority of items substantively engaging in ethical discussion around disaster planning do so regarding triage and why ethics is needed in disaster response generally. Public health implications. A significant evolution in disaster planning has occurred within the past decade; ethical theories and frameworks have been put to work. For ethical guidance to be useful, it must be practical and implementable. Although high-level, abstract frameworks were once prevalent in disaster planning—especially in the early days of pandemic planning—concerns about the ethically difficult concept of CSCs pervade scholarly articles. Ethical norms must be clearly stated and justified and practical guidelines ought to follow from them. Ethical frameworks should guide clinical protocols, but this requires that ethical analysis clarifies what strategies to use to honor ethical commitments and achieve ethical objectives. Such implementation issues must be considered well ahead of a disaster. As governments and health care systems plan for mass casualty events, ethical guidance that is theoretically sound and practically useful can—and should—form an important foundation from which to build practical guidance for responding to disasters with morally appropriate means.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Assessing the Capacity of the US Health Care System to Use Additional Mechanical Ventilators During a Large-Scale Public Health Emergency

              Objective A large-scale public health emergency, such as a severe influenza pandemic, can generate large numbers of critically ill patients in a short time. We modeled the number of mechanical ventilators that could be used in addition to the number of hospital-based ventilators currently in use. Methods We identified key components of the health care system needed to deliver ventilation therapy, quantified the maximum number of additional ventilators that each key component could support at various capacity levels (ie, conventional, contingency, and crisis), and determined the constraining key component at each capacity level. Results Our study results showed that US hospitals could absorb between 26,200 and 56,300 additional ventilators at the peak of a national influenza pandemic outbreak with robust pre-pandemic planning. Conclusions The current US health care system may have limited capacity to use additional mechanical ventilators during a large-scale public health emergency. Emergency planners need to understand their health care systems’ capability to absorb additional resources and expand care. This methodology could be adapted by emergency planners to determine stockpiling goals for critical resources or to identify alternatives to manage overwhelming critical care need. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2015;9:634–641)
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Prehosp Disaster Med
                Prehosp Disaster Med
                PDM
                Prehospital and Disaster Medicine
                Cambridge University Press (New York, USA )
                1049-023X
                1945-1938
                04 November 2020
                : 1-3
                Affiliations
                [1. ]Disaster and Emergency Management Program, School of Continuing Studies, Georgetown University , Washington, DC USA
                [2. ]Department of Information Systems and Business Analytics, College of Business, Florida International University , Miami, Florida USA
                [3. ]Fellowship in Disaster Medicine, Department of Emergency Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center , Boston, Massachusetts USA
                [4. ]Department of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School , Boston, Massachusetts USA
                [5. ]Department of Emergency Medicine, Wexford General Hospital , Wexford, Ireland
                [6. ]School of Medicine, University College Dublin , Dublin, Ireland
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Annie E. Ingram, BA, Georgetown University , School of Continuing Studies, 640 Massachusetts Ave NW, Washington, DC20001USA, E-mail: aes365@ 123456georgetown.edu
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1558-235X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1072-3811
                Article
                S1049023X20001405
                10.1017/S1049023X20001405
                7683817
                33143800
                557bb33c-02b0-4b4a-85e8-6d372f5d2712
                © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2020

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is included and the original work is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use.

                History
                : 24 September 2020
                : 22 October 2020
                Page count
                References: 17, Pages: 3
                Categories
                Editor’s Corner

                crisis standards of care,emergency management,moral distress,pandemic

                Comments

                Comment on this article