N95 respirators are personal protective equipment most often used to control exposures to infections transmitted via the airborne route. Supplies of N95 respirators can become depleted during pandemics or when otherwise in high demand. In this paper, we offer strategies for optimizing supplies of N95 respirators in health care settings while maximizing the level of protection offered to health care personnel when there is limited supply in the United States during the 2019 coronavirus disease pandemic. The strategies are intended for use by professionals who manage respiratory protection programs, occupational health services, and infection prevention programs in health care facilities to protect health care personnel from job-related risks of exposure to infectious respiratory illnesses. Consultation with federal, state, and local public health officials is also important. We use the framework of surge capacity and the occupational health and safety hierarchy of controls approach to discuss specific engineering control, administrative control, and personal protective equipment measures that may help in optimizing N95 respirator supplies.

The outbreak of a novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is challenging international public health and health care efforts. As hospitals work to acquire enough personal protective equipment and brace for potential cases, the role of infection prevention efforts and programs has become increasingly important. Lessons from the 2003 SARS-CoV outbreak in Toronto and 2015 MERS-CoV outbreak in South Korea have unveiled the critical role that hospitals play in outbreaks, especially of novel coronaviruses. Their ability to amplify the spread of disease can rapidly fuel transmission of the disease, and often those failures in infection prevention and general hospital practices contribute to such events. While efforts to enhance infection prevention measures and hospital readiness are underway in the United States, it is important to understand why these programs were not able to maintain continued, sustainable levels of readiness. History has shown that infection prevention programs are primarily responsible for preparing hospitals and responding to biological events but face understaffing and focused efforts defined by administrators. The current US health care system, though, is built upon a series of priorities that often view biopreparedness as a costly endeavor. Awareness of these competing priorities and the challenges that infection prevention programs face when working to maintain biopreparedness is critical in adequately addressing this critical infrastructure in the face of an international outbreak.

In response to the rapid spread of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), health-care systems should establish procedures for early recognition and management of suspected or confirmed cases. We describe the various steps taken for the development, implementation, and dissemination of the interdisciplinary COVID-19 protocol at Jackson Health System (JHS), a complex tertiary academic health system in Miami, Florida. Recognizing the dynamic nature of COVID-19, the protocol addresses the potential investigational treatment options and considerations for special populations. The protocol also includes infection prevention and control measures and routine care for suspected or proven COVID-19 patients.

Over the years, the practice of medicine has evolved from authority-based to experience-based to evidence-based with the introduction of the scientific process, clinical trials, and outcomes-based data analysis (Tebala GD. Int J Med Sci. 2018;15(12):1397-1405). The time required to perform the necessary randomized controlled trials, a systematic literature review, and meta-analysis of these trials to then create, accept, promulgate, and educate the practicing clinicians to use the evidence-based clinical guidelines is typically measured in years. When the severe acute respiratory syndrome novel coronavirus-2 (SARS-nCoV-2) pandemic commenced in Wuhan, China at the end of 2019, there were few available clinical guidelines to deploy, let alone adapt and adopt to treat the surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. The aim of this study is to first explain how clinical guidelines, on which bedside clinicians have grown accustomed, can be created in the midst of a pandemic, with an evolving scientific understanding of the pathophysiology of the hypercoagulable state. The second is to adapt and adopt current venous thromboembolism diagnostic and treatment guidelines, while relying on the limited available observational reporting of COVID-19 patients to create a comprehensive clinical guideline to treat COVID-19 patients.

Research from financial stress, disasters, pandemics, and other extreme events, suggests that behavioral health will suffer, including anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms. Furthermore, these symptoms are likely to exacerbate alcohol or drug use, especially for those vulnerable to relapse. The nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and vast reach of the virus, leave many unknows for the repercussions on behavioral health, yet existing research suggests that behavioral health concerns should take a primary role in response to the pandemic. We propose a 4-step services system designed for implementation with a variety of different groups and reserves limited clinical services for the most extreme reactions. While we can expect symptoms to remit overtime, many will also have longer-term or more severe concerns. Behavioral health interventions will likely need to change overtime and different types of interventions should be considered for different target groups, such as for those who recover from COVID-19, health-care professionals, and essential personnel; and the general public either due to loss of loved ones or significant life disruption. The important thing is to have a systematic plan to support behavioral health and to engage citizens in prevention and doing their part in recovery by staying home and protecting others.

Health care facilities are always seen as places of haven and protection for managing external incidents, but situations become difficult and challenging when such facilities themselves are affected by internal hazards. Such incidents are arguably more disruptive than external incidents, because patients are dependent on supportive measures and are neither in position to respond to such crisis situation nor do they know how to respond. Operating room fires are rare but potentially catastrophic, involving loss of costly resources and possibly lives. This case report details a true operating room fire incident in an emergency operating room and details the real-life challenges encountered by operating room staff in preserving both life and property. As a result of this work, precautionary measures may be implemented to mitigate such incidents. Careful coordination, continuous training, and fire drill exercises can improve the overall outcomes and minimize the possibility of these potentially fatal problems, thereby making a safer health care environment for every worker and patient.

Multiple professional societies, nongovernment and government agencies have studied the science of sudden onset disaster mass casualty incidents to create and promote surge response guidelines. The COVID-19 pandemic has presented the health-care system with challenges that have limited science to guide the staff, stuff, and structure surge response.

This study reviewed the available surge science literature specifically to guide an emergency department’s surge structural response using a translational science approach to answer the question: How does the concept of sudden onset mass casualty incident surge capability apply to the process to expand COVID-19 pandemic surge structure response?

The available surge structural science literature was reviewed to determine the application to a pandemic response. The on-line ahead of print and print COVID-19 scientific publications, as well as gray literature were studied to learn the best available COVID-19 surge structural response science. A checklist was created to guide the emergency department team’s COVID-19 surge structural response.

In November 2017, a disruptive earthquake occurred in Western Iran. After the major earthquake in Kermanshah, most affordable buildings such as a hospital in Islamabad and a dozen schools were destroyed. According to experts, a dangerous location (construction on the fault), poor quality of concrete, inappropriate connection of the facade to the structure, the use of undesirable construction materials, and low quality of non-structural components are considered as the main reasons for these damages. Regarding the role of government in the developing countries, construction policies should be modified and new policies should be implemented to enhance the structural and non-structural resilience in the buildings.

In December, 2019, an infectious outbreak of unknown cause occurred in Wuhan, which attracted intense attention. Shortly after the virus was identified as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) broke out, and an information storm occurred. At that time, 2 important aspects, that is, the stages of spread and the components of the epidemic, were unclear. Answers to the questions (1) what are the sources, (2) how do infections occur, and (3) who will be affected should be clarified as the outbreak continues to evolve. Furthermore, components of the epidemic and the stages of spread should be explored and discussed. Based on information of SARS, Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and COVID-19, the components of the epidemic (the sources, the routes of infection, and the susceptible population) will be discussed, as well as the role of natural and social factors involved. Epidemiologic characteristics of patients will be traced based on current information.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has greatly impacted health-care systems worldwide, leading to an unprecedented rise in demand for health-care resources. In anticipation of an acute strain on established medical facilities in Dallas, Texas, federal officials worked in conjunction with local medical personnel to convert a convention center into a Federal Medical Station capable of caring for patients affected by COVID-19. A 200,000 square foot event space was designated as a direct patient care area, with surrounding spaces repurposed to house ancillary services. Given the highly transmissible nature of the novel coronavirus, the donning and doffing of personal protective equipment (PPE) was of particular importance for personnel staffing the facility. Furthermore, nationwide shortages in the availability of PPE necessitated the reuse of certain protective materials. This article seeks to delineate the procedures implemented regarding PPE in the setting of a COVID-19 disaster response shelter, including workspace flow, donning and doffing procedures, PPE conservation, and exposure event protocols.

The aim of this systematic review was to locate and analyze United States state crisis standards of care (CSC) documents to determine their prevalence and quality. Following PRISMA guidelines, Google search for “allocation of scarce resources” and “crisis standards of care (CSC)” for each state. We analyzed the plans based on the 2009 Institute of Medicine (IOM) report, which provided guidance for establishing CSC for use in disaster situations, as well as the 2014 CHEST consensus statement’s 11 core topic areas. The search yielded 42 state documents, and we excluded 11 that were not CSC plans. Of the 31 included plans, 13 plans were written for an “all hazards” approach, while 18 were pandemic influenza specific. Eighteen had strong ethical grounding. Twenty-one plans had integrated and ongoing community and provider engagement, education, and communication. Twenty-two had assurances regarding legal authority and environment. Sixteen plans had clear indicators, triggers, and lines of responsibility. Finally, 28 had evidence-based clinical processes and operations. Five plans contained all 5 IOM elements: Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, and Vermont. Colorado and Minnesota have all hazards documents and processes for both adult and pediatric populations and could be considered exemplars for other states.

The integration of external staff into a hospital’s disaster response can present technical challenges. Although hospitals will always prefer to use their own staff in disaster response, there have been many historical examples where external staffing is required. During the 2016 Kumamoto Earthquakes, the Oita Prefectural Hospital required medical professionals to expand disaster response staff. They were able to identify 2 appropriate emergency physicians belonging to a remote hospital who had previously worked at the Oita Prefectural hospital. The physicians were effectively able to supplement the hospital staff, providing care for additional patients, and giving the existing on-duty staff some respite. Based on our experience, we suggest that hospital coalitions and disaster response authorities explore mechanisms of cross-credentialing and cross-training staff to make it easier to share staff in a disaster.

On Tuesday, March 17, 2020, at noon, France became the third European country to impose a nationwide containment policy in the fight against epidemic coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) viral infection. Announcing that the country was at “war,” President Macron called upon all to play a role in mitigating against further development of contagion. This extreme measure never seen before during peace time was the result of adapting not only the French Pandemic Influenza Plan (PIP) being applied to the national context but also real-time clinical, epidemiological, and scientific information about the evolution of COVID-19 infection in the country. The situation was further complicated by local municipal elections and political agendas by populist opinions. Despite mass communication about the importance of individual behavioral attitudes to counter disease propagation, few heeded government advice. Consequently, the situation rapidly deteriorated with increasing number of cases that started to overwhelm health services. As a result, decisive and immediate action was taken by the State for the national public health interest. This report from the field details the timely events that contributed to this extreme policy decision taken by France. A policy decision that other Western democracies have since applied as the pandemic disseminated across the globe.

Case-Fatality Rate (CFR) for COVID-19 in Italy is apparently much higher than in other countries. Using data from Italy and other countries we evaluated the role of different determinants of this phenomenon. We found that the Italian testing strategy could explain an important part of the observed difference in CFR. In particular, the majority of patients that are currently tested in Italy have severe clinical symptoms that usually require hospitalization and this translates to a large CFR. We are confident that, once modifications in the testing strategy leading to higher population coverage are consistently adopted in Italy, CFR will realign with the values reported worldwide.

The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2 is expanding globally. South Korea is one of the countries most affected by COVID-19 from the very early stages of this pandemic. Explosive outbreaks occurred across South Korea in the first two months, and efforts to control this new virus have involved everyone across the country. To curb the transmission of the virus, health-care professionals, committees, and governments have combined many approaches, such as extensive COVID-19 screening, effective patient triage, the transparent provision of information, and the use of information technology. This experience could provide some valuable ideas and lessons to others who are fighting against COVID-19.