31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Clinical Review: Communication and logistics in the response to the 1998 terrorist bombing in Omagh, Northern Ireland

      review-article
      1 , , 2
      Critical Care
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      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

          The Omagh bombing in August 1998 produced many of the problems documented in other major incidents. An initial imbalance between the demand and supply of clinical resources at the local hospital, poor information due to telecommunication problems, the need to triage victims and the need to transport the most severely injured significant distances were the most serious issues. The Royal Group Hospitals Trust (RGHT) received 30 severely injured secondary transfers over a 5-hour period, which stressed the hospital's systems even with the presence of extra staff that arrived voluntarily before the hospital's major incident plan was activated. Many patients were transferred to the RGHT by helicopter, but much of the time the gained advantage was lost due to lack of a helipad within the RGHT site. Identifying patients and tracking them through the hospital system was problematic. While the major incident plan ensured that communication with the relatives and the media was effective and timely, communication between the key clinical and managerial staff was hampered by the need to be mobile and by the limitations of the internal telephone system. The use of mobile anaesthetic teams helped maintain the flow of patients between the Emergency Department and radiology, operating theatres or the intensive care unit (ICU). The mobile anaesthetic teams were also responsible for efficient and timely resupply of the Emergency Department, which worked well. In the days that followed many victims required further surgical procedures. Coordination of the multidisciplinary teams required for many of these procedures was difficult. Although only seven patients required admission to adult general intensive care, no ICU beds were available for other admissions over the following 5 days. A total of 165 days of adult ICU treatment were required for the victims of the bombing.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

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

          Terrorist bombings. Lessons learned from Belfast to Beirut.

          Experience in the management of mass casualties following a disaster is relatively sparse. The terrorist bombing serves as a timely and effective model for the analysis of patterns of injury and mortality and the determination of the factors influencing casualty survival in the wake of certain forms of disaster. For this purpose, a review of the published experience with terrorist bombings was carried out, providing a study population of 3357 casualties from 220 incidents worldwide. There were 2934 immediate survivors of these incidents (87%), of whom 881 (30%) were hospitalized. Forty deaths ultimately occurred among these survivors (1.4%), 39 of whom were among those hospitalized (4.4%). Injury severity was determined from available data for 1339 surviving casualties, 251 of whom were critically injured (18.7%). Of this population evaluable for injury severity, there were 31 late deaths, all of which occurred among those critically injured, accounting for an overall "critical mortality" rate of 12.4%. Overall triage efficiency was characterized by a mean overtriage rate (noncritically injured among those hospitalized or evacuated) of 59%, and a mean undertriage rate (critically injured among those not hospitalized or evacuated) of .05%. Multiple linear regression analysis of all major bombing incidents demonstrated a direct linear relationship between overtriage and critical mortality (r2 = .845), and an inversely proportional relationship between triage discrimination and critical mortality (r2 = 0.855). Although head injuries predominated in both immediate (71%) and late (52%) fatalities, injury to the abdomen carried the highest specific mortality rate (19%) of any single body system injury among immediate survivors. These data clearly document the importance of accurate triage as a survival determinant for critically injured casualties of these disasters. Furthermore, the data suggest that explosive force, time interval from injury to treatment, and anatomic site of injury are all factors that correlated with the ultimate outcome of terrorist bombing victims. Critical analysis of past disasters should allow for sufficient preparation so as to minimize casualty mortality in the future.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            11 March 2004: The terrorist bomb explosions in Madrid, Spain – an analysis of the logistics, injuries sustained and clinical management of casualties treated at the closest hospital

            At 07:39 on 11 March 2004, 10 terrorist bomb explosions occurred almost simultaneously in four commuter trains in Madrid, Spain, killing 177 people instantly and injuring more than 2000. There were 14 subsequent in-hospital deaths, bringing the ultimate death toll to 191. This report describes the organization of clinical management and patterns of injuries in casualties who were taken to the closest hospital, with an emphasis on the critically ill. A total of 312 patients were taken to the hospital and 91 patients were hospitalized, of whom 89 (28.5%) remained in hospital for longer than 24 hours. Sixty-two patients had only superficial bruises or emotional shock, but the remaining 250 patients had more severe injuries. Data on 243 of these 250 patients form the basis of this report. Tympanic perforation occurred in 41% of 243 victims with moderate-to-severe trauma, chest injuries in 40%, shrapnel wounds in 36%, fractures in 18%, first-degree or second-degree burns in 18%, eye lesions in 18%, head trauma in 12% and abdominal injuries in 5%. Between 08:00 and 17:00, 34 surgical interventions were performed in 32 patients. Twenty-nine casualties (12% of the total, or 32.5% of those hospitalized) were deemed to be in a critical condition, and two of these died within minutes of arrival. The other 27 survived to admission to intensive care units, and three of them died, bringing the critical mortality rate to 17.2% (5/29). The mean Injury Severity Score and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores for critically ill patients were 34 and 23, respectively. Among these critically ill patients, soft tissue and musculoskeletal injuries predominated in 85% of cases, ear blast injury was identified in 67% and blast lung injury was present in 63%. Fifty-two per cent suffered head trauma. Over-triage to the closest hospital probably occurred, and the time of the blasts proved to be crucial to the the adequacy of the medical and surgical response. The number of blast lung injuries seen is probably the largest reported by a single institution, and the critical mortality rate was reasonably low.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Hospital preparedness for weapons of mass destruction incidents: an initial assessment.

              We performed an assessment of hospital preparedness for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) incidents in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Region III. Interviews of hospital personnel were completed in 30 hospitals. Data collected included level of preparedness, mass decontamination capabilities, training of hospital staff, and facility security capabilities. No respondents believed their sites were fully prepared to handle a biologic incident, 73% (22/30) believed they were not prepared to manage a chemical weapons incident, and 73% believed they were unprepared to handle a nuclear event. If a WMD incident were to occur, 73% of respondents stated a single-room decontamination process would be set up. Four (13%) hospitals (all rural) reported no decontamination plans. WMD preparedness had been incorporated into hospital disaster plans by 27% (8/30) of facilities. Eighty-seven percent (26/30) believed their emergency department could manage 10 to 50 casualties at once. Only 1 facility had stockpiled any medications for WMD treatment. All facilities had established networks of communication. No hospital had preprepared media statements specific to WMD. Nearly one fourth (7/30) stated that their hospital staff had some training in WMD event management. All reported need for WMD-specific training but identified obstacles to achieving this. Seventy-seven percent (23/30) of hospitals had a facility security plan in place, and half were able to perform a hospital-wide lock down. Ninety-six percent (29/30) reported no awareness regarding the threat of a secondary device. Hospitals in this sample do not appear to be prepared to handle WMD events, especially in areas such as mass decontamination, mass medical response, awareness among health care professionals, health communications, and facility security. Further research is warranted, including a detailed assessment of WMD preparedness using a statistically valid sample representative of hospital emergency personnel at the national level.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Crit Care
                Critical Care
                BioMed Central (London )
                1364-8535
                1466-609X
                2005
                23 March 2005
                : 9
                : 4
                : 401-408
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Director of Critical Care Services, Royal Group Hospitals Trust, Belfast, UK
                [2 ]Specialist Registrar, Northern Ireland Intensive Care Medicine Training Programme, Royal Group Hospitals Trust, Belfast, UK
                Article
                cc3502
                10.1186/cc3502
                1269428
                16137391
                a39cdc44-8526-4443-90f8-a466224cc24a
                Copyright © 2005 BioMed Central Ltd
                History
                Categories
                Review

                Emergency medicine & Trauma
                Emergency medicine & Trauma

                Comments

                Comment on this article