Non-technical skills needed by medical disaster responders- a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: There is no universal agreement on what competence in disaster medicine is, nor what competences and personal attributes add value for disaster responders. Some studies suggest that disaster responders need not only technical skills but also non-technical skills. Consensus of which non-technical skills are needed and how training for these can be provided is lacking, and little is known about how to apply knowledge of non-technical skills in the recruitment of disaster responders. Therefore, this scoping review aimed to identify the non-technical skills required for the disaster medicine response. METHOD: A scooping review using the Arksey & O´Malley framework was performed. Structured searches in the databases PuBMed, CINAHL Full Plus, Web of Science, PsycInfo and Scopus was conducted. Thereafter, data were structured and analyzed. RESULTS: From an initial search result of 6447 articles, 34 articles were included in the study. These covered both quantitative and qualitative studies and different contexts, including real events and training. The most often studied real event were responses following earthquakes. Four non-technical skills stood out as most frequently mentioned: communication skills; situational awareness; knowledge of human resources and organization and coordination skills; decision-making, critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. The review also showed a significant lack of uniform use of terms like skills or competence in the reviewed articles. CONCLUSION: Non-technical skills are skills that disaster responders need. Which non-technical skills are most needed, how to train and measure non-technical skills, and how to implement non-technical skills in disaster medicine need further studies.

Facilitators and Barriers for Effective Staff Work in Swedish National Governmental Crisis Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) crisis response in Sweden was managed foremost by a collaboration of several national agencies. Normally, their strategical and operational collaboration is limited, but the pandemic required new and unfamiliar collaborations. This study aimed to clarify the facilitators and barriers of perceived effective staff work within and between 4 national agencies. METHODS: A qualitative study of 10 participants with leading roles within the 4 national agencies' crisis organization was conducted via snowball sampling. The participant interviews were conducted between August and November 2020 and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: Four categories emerged from the analysis: individual characteristics, intra-agency organization, interorganizational collaboration, and governmental directives. Subcategories crystallized from the data were analyzed and divided into factors for facilitating or to function as barriers for effective staff work. CONCLUSION: Individual factors such as attitude and approach were important for perceived effective staff work as well as clear mandates and structure of the organization. Barriers for perceived effective staff work include lack of network, the complexity of the mission and organizational structures, as well as lack of preparations and unclear mandates. Although flexibility and adaptability are necessary, they cannot always be planned, but can be incorporated indirectly by selecting suitable individuals and optimizing organizational planning.