Disaster healthcare disparities solutions: Part 2-Response.

The purpose of this study was to explore the potential solutions for disaster healthcare disparities. This paper is the second of a three-part series that was written by the Disaster Healthcare Disparities Workgroup of the American College of Emergency Physicians Disaster Preparedness and Response Committee. The committee conducted a literature review and chose articles most representative and demonstrative of solutions to disaster healthcare disparities found in a past workgroup product. Many solutions for disaster healthcare disparities during disaster response were found. Some of these solutions have been successfully implemented and some are hypothetical. Solutions for disaster healthcare disparities seen during response are achievable but there is still much work to do. A variety of the proposed solutions can be advocated for by nondisaster specialists leading to better care for all our patients.

Disaster healthcare disparities solutions: Part 1-Preparation.

The purpose of this study was to explore the potential solutions for disaster healthcare disparities. This paper is the first of a three-part series that was written by the Disaster Healthcare Disparities Workgroup of the American College of Emergency Physicians Disaster Preparedness and Response Committee. The committee workgroup conducted a literature review and chose articles most representative and demonstrative of solutions to disaster healthcare disparities found in a past workgroup product exploring disaster healthcare disparities seen in disaster. Many solutions for disaster healthcare disparities during preparation were found. Some of these solutions have been successfully implemented, while others are still theoretical. Solutions for disaster healthcare disparities seen in disaster preparation are achievable, but there is still much work to do. There are a variety of solutions that can be easily advocated for by disaster and nondisaster specialists, leading to better care for our patients.

Disaster healthcare disparities solutions: Part 3-Recovery and mitigation.

The purpose of this study was to explore the potential solutions for disaster healthcare disparities. This paper is the third of a three-part series that was written by the Disaster Healthcare Disparities Workgroup of the American College of Emergency Physicians Disaster Preparedness and Response Committee. The committee conducted a literature review and chose articles most representative and demonstrative of solutions to disaster healthcare disparities found in a past workgroup product. Many solutions for disaster healthcare disparities seen during recovery and mitigation were found. Some of these solutions have been successfully implemented and some remain theoretical. Solutions for disaster healthcare disparities seen during recovery and mitigation are achievable but there is still much work to do. Many of these solutions can be advocated for by nondisaster specialists.

Using a Logic Model to Enable and Evaluate Long-Term Outcomes of a Mass Casualty Training Program: A Single Center Case Study.

PURPOSE: Global health disasters are on the rise and can occur at any time with little advance warning, necessitating preparation. The authors created a comprehensive evidence-based Emergency Preparedness Training Program focused on long-term retention and sustained learner engagement. METHOD: A prospective observational study was conducted of a simulation-based mass casualty event training program designed using an outcomes-based logic model. A total of 25 frontline healthcare workers from multiple hospital sites in the New York metropolitan area participated in an 8-hour immersive workshop. Data was collected from assessments, and surveys provided to participants 3 weeks prior to the workshop, immediately following the workshop, and 3 months after completion of the workshop. RESULTS: The mean percentage of total knowledge scores improved across pre-workshop, post-workshop and retention (3 months post-workshop) assessments (53.2% vs. 64.8% vs. 67.6%, P < 0.05). Average comfort scores in the core MCI competencies increased across pre-workshop, post-workshop and retention self-assessments (P < 0.01). Of the participants assessed at 3 months retention (n = 14, 56%), 50.0% (n = 7) assisted in updating their hospital's emergency operations plan and 50.0% (n = 7) pursued further self-directed learning in disaster preparedness medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the logic model provided a transparent framework for the design, implementation, and evaluation of a competency-based EPT program at a single academic center.

The Addition of High-Technology Into the Stop the Bleed Program Among School Personnel Improves Short-Term Skill Application, Not Long-Term Retention.

INTRODUCTION: The Stop the Bleed (STB) program trains the general public on identifying and treating life-threatening bleeding. Data on efficacy and retention of skills taught through this program are limited, with the role of high-technology modalities to augment the program, such as simulation and feedback devices, untested. METHODS: A convenience sample of 66 school personnel participated in an open-label observational study from January to August 2019. The control group received the standard bleeding control course, while the intervention group received the bleeding control course with addition of a simulation and a feedback device for wound packing. Assessment was performed by STB instructors using performance metrics from prior studies as well as a feedback device. Retention testing was performed 2 to 8 months after intervention. The study was approved by the hospital's institutional review board. RESULTS: The intervention group performed better than the control group on correct tourniquet application [90.3% vs. 71.0%; odds ratio (OR) = 11.28; P = 0.015; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.86 to 104.67] wound packing scores (59.5% vs. 29.6%; OR = 0.33; P = 0.007; 95% CI = 9.36 to 56.00) and were more likely to assess their safety (OR = 5.49; P = 0.034; 95% CI = 1.28 to 27.66), and reported higher comfort scores on stepping into an emergency scenario (OR = 11.19; P = 0.004; 95% CI = 2.51 to 63.11), wound packing (OR = 5.16; P = 0.025; 95% CI = 1.35 to 22.46), and using a tourniquet (OR = 11.41; P = 0.003; 95% CI = 2.57 to 67.59). Thirty-one participants (46.9%) were assessed again at retention 2 to 8 months later where scores for tourniquet placement and wound packing were not significantly different in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Augmenting STB with simulation and feedback improved both self-reported comfort level and skill set of participants, but the retention of skills was poor in both groups.