Skip to main content Accessibility help

Emergency Medical Assistance Team Response following Taiwan Chi-Chi Earthquake

  • Edbert B. Hsu (a1), Matthew Ma (a2), Fang Yue Lin (a3), Michael J. VanRooyen (a1) and Frederick M. Burkle (a1)...



On 21 September, 1999, an earthquake measuring 7.3 on the Richter scale, struck central Taiwan near the town of Chi-Chi. The event resulted in 2,405 deaths and 11,306 injuries. Ad hoc emergency medical assistance teams (EMATs) from Taiwan assumed the responsibility for initiating early assessments and providing medical care.


To determine whether the EMATs served a key role in assisting critically injured patients through the assessment of number and level of hospitals responding, training background, timeliness of response, and acuity of patient encounters.


Local and national health bureaus were contacted to identify hospitals that responded to the disaster. A comprehensive questionnaire was piloted and then, sent to those major medical centers that dispatched EMATs within the first 72 hours following the quake. In-depth interviews also were conducted with team leaders.


A total number of 104 hospitals/clinics responded to the disaster, including nine major medical centers and 12 regional hospitals. Each of the major medical centers/regional hospitals that dispatched EMATs during the first 72 hours following the quake were surveyed. Also, 20 individual team leaders were interviewed. Seventy-nine percent of the EMATs from the hospitals responded spontaneously to the scene, while only 21% were dispatched directly by national or local health authorities. Combining the phases of the disaster response, it is estimated that only 7% of EMATs were providing on-site care within the first 12 hours following the earthquake, 17% within <18 hours, and 20% within <24 hours. Thus, 80% of these EMATs required >24 hours to respond to the site. Based on a ED I-IV triage system (Level-I, highest acuity; Level-IV, lowest acuity), the vast majority of patient encounters consisted of Level-III and Level-IV patients. Fewer than 16% of teams encountered >10 Level-I patients, and <28% of teams evaluated >10 Level-II patients.


1. The response from EMATs was impressive, but largely uncoordinated in the absence of a pre-existing dispatching mechanism.

2. Most of the EMATs required >24 hours to reach the disaster sites, and generally, did not arrive in time to affect the outcome of victims with preventable deaths. Therefore, there is an urgent need to strengthen local prehospital care.

3. A central governmental body that ensures better horizontal and vertical integration, and a comprehensive emergency management system is required in order to improve future disaster response and mitigation efforts.


Corresponding author

Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, #7 Chung-Shan South Road, Taipei, Taiwan


Hide All
1. The 43rd Report from the Central Weather Bureau, Ministry of Transport and Communication, Republic of China. Available at Accessed 11 October, 1999.
2. Department of Health, Republic of China. Available at Accessed 14 November, 1999.
3. Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics Executive Yuan, Republic of China. Available at Accessed March 2000.
4. Noji, EK: Earthquakes. In: Noji, EK. The Public Health Consequences of Disasters. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1997. pp 135178.
5. Waeckerle, J: Disaster planning and response. N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 815821
6. Survey interviews with individual EMAT leaders, 3–15 October 1999.
7. Aghababian, R, Lewis, CP, Gans, L, et al: Disasters within hospitals. Ann Emerg Med 1994; 23: 771777.
8. Burkle, FM, Hayden, R: The concept of assisted large-scale disasters by horizontal organizations. Prehosp Disast Med 2001; 16: 8796.
9. Garshne, V, Burkle, FM: Telecommunication systems in support of disaster medicine: Applications of basic information pathways. Ann Emerg Med 1999; 34: 213218.
10. Pretto, EA, Ricci, E, Klain, M, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia. III. Results, conclusions, and recommendations. Prehosp Disaster Med 1992; 7: 327337.
11. Pretto, EA, Angus, DC, Abrams, JI, et al: An analysis of prehospital mortality in an earthquake. Prehosp Disast Med 1994; 9: 107124.
12. Thiel, CC, Schneider, JE, Hiatt, D, et al: 911 EMS process in the Loma Prieta earthquake. Prehosp Disast Med 1992; 7: 348358.
13. Sheng, ZY: Medical support in the Tangshan earthquake: A review of the management of mass casualties and certain major injuries. J Trauma 1987; 27: 11301135.
14. DeBruycker, M, Greco, D, Annino, I, et al: The 1980 earthquake in southern Italy: Rescue of trapped victims and mortality. Bull World Health Organ 1983; 61: 10211025.
15. Noji, EK: Medical and health care aspects of the 1988 earthquake in Soviet Armenia. Earthquake Spectra 1989; 5: Suppl: 101107.
16. Schultz, CH, Koenig, KL, Noji, EK: A medical disaster response to reduce immediate mortality after an earthquake. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 438444.
17. National Fire Department Administrations, Ministry of Interior, Republic of China. Available at: Accessed 14 November, 1999.
18. Liang, NJ, Shih, YT, Shih, FY, et al: Disaster epidemiology and medical response in the Chi-Chi Earthquake in Taiwan. Ann Emerg Med 2001; 38: 549555.
19. DeVille, C, Jeannee, E: Earthquake in Guatemala: Epidemiological evaluation of the relief effort. Emerg Plann Dig 1977; 4: 28.
20. Noji, EK: Evaluation of the efficacy of disaster response: Research at the Johns Hopkins University. UNDRO News 1987: 1113.


Emergency Medical Assistance Team Response following Taiwan Chi-Chi Earthquake

  • Edbert B. Hsu (a1), Matthew Ma (a2), Fang Yue Lin (a3), Michael J. VanRooyen (a1) and Frederick M. Burkle (a1)...


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed