Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Health-Related Relief in the Former Yugoslavia: Needs, Demands, and Supplies

  • Margareta Rubin (a1), J. Hans A. Heuvelmans (a2), Anja Tomic-Cica (a3) and Marvin L. Birnbaum (a4)

Abstract

Introduction:

Many organizations rally to areas to provide assistance to a population during a disaster. Little is known about the ability of the materials and services provided to meet the actual needs and demands of the affected population. This study sought to identify the perceptions of representatives of the international organizations providing this aid, the international workers involved with the delivery of this aid, the workers who were employed locally by the international organizations, the recipients, and the local authorities. This study sought to identify the perceptions of these personnel relative to the adequacies of the supplies in meeting the needs and demands of the population during and following the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Methods:

Structured interviews were conducted with representatives of international organizations and workers providing aid and with locally employed workers, recipients of the assistance, and the authorities of the areas involved. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used to assist in the analysis of the data.

Results:

Eighty-eight interviews were conducted. A total of 246 organizations were identified as providing assistance within the area, and 54% were involved with health-related activities including: 1) the provision of medications; 2) public health measures; and 3) medical equipment or parts for the same. Internationals believed that a higher proportion of the needs were being met by the assistance (73.4 ±16.4%) than did the nationals (52.1 ±23.3%; p <0.001). All groups believed that approximately 50% of the demands of the affected population were being addressed. However, 87% of the international interviewees believed that the affected population was requesting more than it actually needed.

While 27% of the international participants believed that ≥25% of what was provided was unusable, 80% of the recipients felt that ≥25% of the provisions were not usable. Whereas two-thirds of the international participants believed that ≥25% of the demands for assistance by the affected community could not be justified, only 20% of the recipients and authorities believed ≥25% of the demands were unjustified.

Conclusions::

Many organizations are involved in the provision of medical assistance during a disaster. However, international organizations and workers believe their efforts are more effective than do the recipients.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Socialstyrelsen, The Swedish Board of Health and Welfare, Department of Emergency and Disaster Planning, Stockholm, Sweden, E-mail: margareta.rubin@chello.se

References

Hide All
1.Gunn, SWA: Multilingual Dictionary of Disaster Medicine and International Relief. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 1990. p23.
2.Al-Madhari, AF, Keller, AZ: Review of disaster definitions. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1997;12(1):1721.
3.Sundnes, KO, Task Force on Quality Control of Disaster Management: Health disaster management: Guidelines for evaluation and research in the Utstein style. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1999;14(2):4352.
4.Pan American Health Organization: San José Declaration. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1999;14(3):153154.
5.Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization: Evaluation of the preparedness and response to Hurricanes Georges and Mitch: Conclusions and recommendations. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1999; 14(2):5365.
6.Johnson, WP, Lanza, CV: After Hurricane Andrew: An EMS perspective. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1993;8(2):169171.
7.Burkle, FM Jr: Complex humanitarian emergencies: I. Concept and participants. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1995;10(1):3642.
8.Burkle, FM Jr: Complex humanitarian emergencies: II. Medical liaison and training. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1995;10(1):4347.
9.Burkle, FM Jr: Complex humanitarian emergencies: III. Measures of effectiveness. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1995;10(1):4856.
10.Maningas, PA, Robison, M, Mallonee, S: The EMS response to the Oklahoma City bombing. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1997;12(2):8085.
11.Tyron, JR: Medical relief mission to Bosnia/Herzegovina: A case report. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1997;12(2): 96102.
12.Leonard, RB, Spangler, HM, Stringer, LW: Medical outreach after Hurricane Marilyn. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1997;12(3):189194.
13.Binder, S, Sanderson, L: The role of the epidemiologist in natural disasters. Ann Emerg Med 1987;16:10811084.
14.Lillibridge, S, Noji, E, Burkle, F: Disaster assessment: The emergency health evaluation of a population affected by a disaster. Ann Emerg Med 1993;22:17151720.
15.Alexander, D: The health effects of earthquakes in the mid 1990s. Disasters 1996;20:231247.
16.Noji, E, Kelen, G, Armenian, H, et al: The 1988 earthquake in Soviet Armenia: A case study. Ann Emerg Med 1990;19: 891897.
17.De Bruycker, M, Greco, M, Lechat, M: The 1980 earthquake in Southern Italy: Morbidity and mortality. Intl J Epidemiol 1985;14:113117.
18.Ebergardt-Phillips, J, Saunders, T, Robinson, A, et al: Profile of mortality from the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake using coroner and medical examiner reports. Disasters 1994;18:160170.
19.Klain, M, Ricci, E, Safar, P, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia: I. Methodology and preliminary results. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1989;4:135154.
20.Ricci, EM, Pretto, EA, Safar, P, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia. II. Methods for evaluation and response to major disasters. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1991;6:159166.
21.Pretto, EA, Ricci, E, Klain, M, et al: Disaster reanimatology potentials: A structured interview study in Armenia. III. Results, conclusions, recommendations. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1992;7:327338.
22.Pretto, EA, Angus, DC, Abrams, JI, et al: An analysis of prehospital mortality in an earthquake. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;9:107124.
23.Sáenz, R, Bissell, RA, Paniagua, F: Post-disaster malaria in Costa Rica. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1994;10:154160.
24.Angus, DC, Pretto, AE, Abrams, JI, et al: Epidemiologic assessment of mortality, building collapse pattern, and medical response after the 1992 earthquake in Turkey. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine 1997;12(3): 222231.
25.Schultz, CH, Koenig, KI, Noji, EK: A medical disaster response to reduce immediate mortality after an earthquake. N Engl J Med 1996;334:438444.
26.Berckmans, P, Dawans, V, Schmets, G, Vandenbergh, D: Inappropriate drug-donation practices in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 1992–1996. N Engl J Med 1997;337:18421845.
27.Autier, P, Ferir, MC, Hairapetien, A, et al: Drug supply in the aftermath of the 1988 Armenian earthquake. Lancet 1990;335:13881390.
28.Ali, HM, Homeida, MM, Abdeen, MA: “Drug dumping” in donations to the Sudan. Lancet 1988;335:538539.
29.Offerhaus, L: Russia: Emergency drug aid goes awry. Lancet 1990;336:745.
30.World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe, Zagreb Area Office: Medical supplies donor guidelines: WHO humanitarian assistance for former Yugoslavia. Version 3:01.04.94. Zagreb, Croatia: World Health Organization, January, 1994.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Health-Related Relief in the Former Yugoslavia: Needs, Demands, and Supplies

  • Margareta Rubin (a1), J. Hans A. Heuvelmans (a2), Anja Tomic-Cica (a3) and Marvin L. Birnbaum (a4)

Metrics

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.