At 08:53 hours on 26 January 2001, an earthquake measuring 6.9 on the Richter scale devastated a large, drought-affected area of northwestern India, the state of Gujarat. The known number killed by the earthquake is 20,005, with 166,000 injured, of whom 20,717 were “seriously” injured. About 370,000 houses were destroyed, and another 922,000 were damaged.

A community health worker using the local language interviewed all of the patients admitted to the Gandhi-Lincoln hospital with an on-site, oral, real-time, Victim Specific Questionnaire (VSQ).

The census showed a predominance of women, children, and young adults, with the average age being 28 years. The majority of the patients had other family members who were also injured (84%), but most had not experienced deaths among family members (86%). Most of the patients (91%) had traveled more than 200 kilometers using their family cars, pick-ups, trucks, or buses to reach the buffer zone hospitals. The daily hospital admission rate returned to pre-event levels five days after the event, and all of the hospital services were restored by nine days after the quake. Most of the patients (83%) received definitive treatment in the buffer zone hospitals; 7% were referred to tertiary-care centers; and 9% took discharge against medical advice.

The entrapped village folk with their traditional architecture had lesser injuries and a higher rescue rate than did the semi-urban townspeople, who were trapped in collapsed concrete masonry buildings and narrow alleys. However, at the time of crisis, aware townspeople were able to tap the available health resources better than were the poor. There was a low incidence of crush injuries. Volunteer doctors from various backgrounds teamed up to meet the medical crisis. International relief agencies working through local groups were more effective. Local relief groups needed to coordinate better. Disaster tourism by various well-meaning agencies took a toll on the providers. Many surgeries may have contributed to subsequent morbidity.

The injury profile was similar to that reported for most other daytime earthquakes. Buffer zone treatment outcomes were better than were the field and damaged hospital outcomes.

On 18 July 2001, a train hauling hazardous materials, including hydrochloric acid, hydrofluoric acid, and acetic acid, derailed in the city of Baltimore, Maryland, resulting in a fire that burned under a downtown street for five days. Firefighters were stymied in their efforts to extinguish the fire, and the city was subjected to thick smoke for several days.

To determine whether an urban chemical fire with a hazardous materials spill resulted in a detectable public health impact, and to demo-graphically describe the at-risk population for potential smoke and chemical exposure.

The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was consulted about possible side effects from chemical exposure. Total numbers of emergency department (ED) patients and admissions from 15:00 hours (h), 15 July 2001 to 15:00 h, 21 July 2001 were collected from five local hospitals. Patient encounters citing specified chief complaints from 15:00 h, 15 July to 15:00 h, 18 July (pre-accident) were compared with the period from 15:00 h, July 18 to 15:00 h, 21 July (post-accident). Data were analyzed using Fisher's exact test. The United States Census Bureau's Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (TIGER) digital database of geographic features and ArcView Geographic Information Systems (GIS) were used to create maps of Baltimore and to identify populations at-risk using attribute census data. Results: There were 62,808 people residing in the immediate, affected area. The mean of the values for age was 33.7 ±3.2 years (standard deviation; range = 16 yrs) with 49% (30,927) males and 51% (31,881) females. A total of 2,922 ED patient encounters were screened. Chief complaints included shortness of breath, pre-event = 109 vs. post-event = 148; chest complaints = 90 vs. 113; burns and/or skin irritation = 45 vs. 42; eye irritation 26 vs. 34; throat irritation = 33 vs. 27; and smoke exposure = 0 vs. 15. There was a statistically significant increase (p <0.05) for shortness of breath and smoke exposure-related complaints. No statistically significant increase in numbers of admitted patients with these complaints was found.

In the setting of a large-scale urban chemical fire, local EDs can expect a significant increase in the number of patients presenting to EDs with shortness of breath and/or smoke inhalation. Most do not require inpatient hospitalization. Careful assessment of impact on local EDs should be considered in future city-accident planning. Some official warnings were widely misinterpreted or ignored. Public education on potential hazards and disaster preparedness targeted to populations at-risk should receive a high priority. Geographic information systems (GIS) may serve as useful tools for identifying demographics of populations at-risk for disaster planning and responses.

The purpose of this study was to describe the regional locations of cardiac arrest, and to identify public locations and the annual incidence of arrests within the identified locations, in order to help to determine optimal placement of Automatic External Defibrillators (AEDs) under the regional Public Access Defibrillation (PAD) Program. This is a retrospective study.

The locations of cardiac arrest were abstracted from Ambulance Call Reports (ACRs) collected by the Essex-Kent Base Hospital Centre from regional ambulance services throughout the City of Windsor, and the Counties of Essex and Kent, Ontario, Canada, from 01 January 1994 through 31 December 2000. Arrest locations were grouped into five categories, and then the number of public venues was determined. Public sites were grouped into 28 Public Locations. Also included in the Public Sites were both General Industry and Outdoors categories. Categories identified but excluded from Public Sites were Institutions and Private Residences.

During the study, 2,295 arrests occurred, 152 cases were excluded, 2,142 arrests were categorized, (average annual incidence of 306 ±50.4 cardiac arrests), 329 (15.4%) of which were in Public Sites. Nineteen public venues had an average of >1 arrest/year, and nine public venues had an average of ≤1 arrest/year during the study, period. Calculations of the annual incidence of arrests for each public location were completed.

These findings have significant prehospital emergency cardiac care implications for communities that wish to strengthen/improve their responses to out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. Public Access Defibrillation Programs should identify the site-specific incidence of arrest within their communities in order to provide legitimacy for funding and planning of programs. Training and availability of AEDs will reduce the time to first shock, thus strengthening the chain-of-survival and will save more lives.

About one million accidents occur yearly in Finland (population 5.2 million), resulting in over 3,000 deaths, annually. The governmental and municipal authorities are responsible for the healthcare services that respond to these accidents. So far, resources for these services have been allocated according to regional equality, or in some cases, on the basis of population numbers. However, economical and effective resource allocation should be based on detailed risk analysis of the accidents.

In areas with more dense populations, the level of social activity is greater, which leads to an increased risk for accidents (traffic, civil disturbance, etc.).

The number of accidents was estimated on the basis of registered emergency trauma patients using the Finnish healthcare statistics for the year 1999. The emergency visits were compared to the populations and populations’ densities of the regional sub-units. The rate of emergency injuries was analysed by regression analysis according to varying population density in Finland.

The number of accidents per inhabitants was related directly to population density. There was a correlation between emergency visits per inhabitant and population density (p <0.0001). According to estimates, each 1% increase in population density is associated with a 0.4% increase in the risk of accidents.

The relationship between population density and rate of emergency visits is decisive for the planning of emergency services. Services should be placed in areas of high population densities where there are more people with greater risk of accidents.