To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Home health agencies have been tasked to improve their patients’ disaster preparedness. Few studies have evaluated the robustness of tools to support preparedness in home health. Through evaluation of the Home-Based Primary Care (HBPC) Patient Assessment Tool, we conducted a survey to identify strengths and challenges in supporting the preparedness of patients served by home health programs such as the Veterans Health Administration’s HBPC program.
Practitioners from 10 HBPC programs fielded the Patient Assessment Tool with all patients during a 3-week period. Logistic regression and bivariate analyses were used to identify patient characteristics associated with the delivery of preparedness education.
A total of 754 Patient Assessment Tools were returned. The educational item most likely to be covered was how to activate 911 services (87%). The item least likely to be discussed was information on emergency shelter registration and emergency specialty transportation (44%). When compared to the low risk group, HBPC patients in the high/medium risk group were more likely to receive preparedness education materials for 6 of the 9 educational preparedness items (P values less than 0.05).
Practitioners are relaying preparedness education to their most vulnerable patients, suggesting that home health agencies can provide disaster preparedness in the home. Nonetheless, there is room for improvement. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:547-554)
The largest gas leak in United States history occurred October 2015 through February 2016 near Porter Ranch (PR), California, and prompted the temporary relocation of nearby residents because of health concerns related to natural gas exposure.
A retrospective cohort study was conducted using US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) administrative and clinical data. On the basis of zip codes, we created two groups: PR (1920 patients) and San Fernando Valley (SFV) (15 260 patients) and examined the proportion of outpatient visits to VA providers with respiratory-related diagnoses between October 2014 and September 2017.
We observed an increase in the proportion of visits in the PR group during the leak (7.0% vs 6.1%, P<0.005) and immediately after the leak (7.7% vs 5.3%, P<0.0001). For both groups, we observed a decrease in respiratory diagnoses one year after the leak (7.0% to 5.9%, P<0.05 PR; 6.1% to 5.7%, P<0.01 SFV).
Exposure to natural gas likely led to the observed increase in respiratory-related diagnoses during and after the PR gas leak. Early relocation following natural gas leaks may mitigate respiratory exacerbations. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:419-423)
There have been numerous initiatives by government and private organizations to help hospitals become better prepared for major disasters and public health emergencies. This study reports on efforts by the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Veterans Health Administration, Office of Emergency Management’s (OEM) Comprehensive Emergency Management Program (CEMP) to assess the readiness of VA Medical Centers (VAMCs) across the nation.
This study conducts descriptive analyses of preparedness assessments of VAMCs and examines change in hospital readiness over time.
To assess change, quantitative analyses of data from two phases of preparedness assessments (Phase I: 2008-2010; Phase II: 2011-2013) at 137 VAMCs were conducted using 61 unique capabilities assessed during the two phases. The initial five-point Likert-like scale used to rate each capability was collapsed into a dichotomous variable: “not-developed=0” versus “developed=1.” To describe changes in preparedness over time, four new categories were created from the Phase I and Phase II dichotomous variables: (1) rated developed in both phases; (2) rated not-developed in Phase I but rated developed in Phase II; (3) rated not-developed in both phases; and (4) rated developed in Phase I but rated not- developed in Phase II.
From a total of 61 unique emergency preparedness capabilities, 33 items achieved the desired outcome – they were rated either “developed in both phases” or “became developed” in Phase II for at least 80% of VAMCs. For 14 items, 70%-80% of VAMCs achieved the desired outcome. The remaining 14 items were identified as “low-performing” capabilities, defined as less than 70% of VAMCs achieved the desired outcome.
Measuring emergency management capabilities is a necessary first step to improving those capabilities. Furthermore, assessing hospital readiness over time and creating robust hospital readiness assessment tools can help hospitals make informed decisions regarding allocation of resources to ensure patient safety, provide timely access to high-quality patient care, and identify best practices in emergency management during and after disasters. Moreover, with some minor modifications, this comprehensive, all-hazards-based, hospital preparedness assessment tool could be adapted for use beyond the VA.
Der-MartirosianC, RadcliffTA, GableAR, RiopelleD, HagigiFA, BrewsterP, DobalianA. Assessing Hospital Disaster Readiness Over Time at the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Prehsop Disaster Med. 2017;32(1):46–57.
Health agencies working with the homebound play a vital role in bolstering a community’s resiliency by improving the preparedness of this vulnerable population. Nevertheless, this role is one for which agencies lack training and resources, which leaves many homebound at heightened risk. This study examined the utility of an evidence-based Disaster Preparedness Toolkit in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Home-Based Primary Care (HBPC) programs.
We conducted an online survey of all VHA HBPC program managers (N=77/146; 53% response rate).
Respondents with fewer years with the HBPC program rated the toolkit as being more helpful (P<0.05). Of those who implemented their program’s disaster protocol most frequently, two-thirds strongly agreed that the toolkit was relevant. Conversely, of those who implemented their disaster protocols very infrequently or never, 23% strongly agreed that the topics covered in the toolkit were relevant to their work (P<0.05).
This toolkit helps support programs as they fulfill their preparedness requirements, especially practitioners who are new to their position in HBPC. Programs that implement disaster protocols infrequently may require additional efforts to increase understanding of the toolkit’s utility. Engaging all members of the team with their diverse clinical expertise could strengthen a patient’s personal preparedness plan. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:56–63)
Hospitals play a critical role in providing health care in the aftermath of disasters and emergencies. Nonetheless, while multiple tools exist to assess hospital disaster preparedness, existing instruments have not been tested adequately for validity.
This study reports on the development of a preparedness assessment tool for hospitals that are part of the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA; Washington, DC USA).
The authors evaluated hospital preparedness in six “Mission Areas” (MAs: Program Management; Incident Management; Safety and Security; Resiliency and Continuity; Medical Surge; and Support to External Requirements), each composed of various observable hospital preparedness capabilities, among 140 VA Medical Centers (VAMCs). This paper reports on two successive assessments (Phase I and Phase II) to assess the MAs’ construct validity, or the degree to which component capabilities relate to one another to represent the associated domain successfully. This report describes a two-stage confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of candidate items for a comprehensive survey implemented to assess emergency preparedness in a hospital setting.
The individual CFAs by MA received acceptable fit statistics with some exceptions. Some individual items did not have adequate factor loadings within their hypothesized factor (or MA) and were dropped from the analyses in order to obtain acceptable fit statistics. The Phase II modified tool was better able to assess the pre-determined MAs. For each MA, except for Resiliency and Continuity (MA 4), the CFA confirmed one latent variable. In Phase I, two sub-scales (seven and nine items in each respective sub-scale) and in Phase II, three sub-scales (eight, four, and eight items in each respective sub-scale) were confirmed for MA 4. The MA 4 capabilities comprise multiple sub-domains, and future assessment protocols should consider re-classifying MA 4 into three distinct MAs.
The assessments provide a comprehensive and consistent, but flexible, approach for ascertaining health system preparedness. This approach can provide an organization with a clear understanding of areas for improvement and could be adapted into a standard for hospital readiness.
DobalianA, SteinJA, RadcliffTA, RiopelleD, BrewsterP, HagigiF, Der-MartirosianC. Developing Valid Measures of Emergency Management Capabilities within US Department of Veterans Affairs Hospitals. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2016;31(5):475–484.
During an earthquake, vulnerable populations, especially those with chronic conditions, are more susceptible to adverse, event-induced exacerbation of chronic conditions such as limited access to food and water, extreme weather temperatures, and injury. These circumstances merit special attention when health care facilities and organizations prepare for and respond to disasters.
This study explores the relationship between pre-earthquake burden of illness and postearthquake health-related and preparedness factors in the US. Data from a cohort of male veterans who were receiving care at the Sepulveda Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC) in Los Angeles, California USA during the 1994 Northridge earthquake were analyzed.
Veterans with one or more chronic conditions were more likely to report pain lasting two or more days, severe mental/emotional stress for more than two weeks, broken/lost medical equipment, having difficulty refilling prescriptions, and being unable to get medical help following the quake compared to veterans without chronic conditions. In terms of personal emergency preparedness, however, there was no association between burden of illness and having enough food or water for at least 24 hours after the earthquake.
The relationship that exists between health care providers, including both individual providers and organizations like the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and their vulnerable, chronically-ill patients affords providers the unique opportunity to deliver critical assistance that could make this vulnerable population better prepared to meet their postdisaster health-related needs. This can be accomplished through education about preparedness and the provision of easier access to medical supplies. Disaster plans for those who are burdened with chronic conditions should meet their social needs in addition to their psychological and physical needs.
Der-MartirosianC, RiopelleD, NaranjoD, YanoE, RubensteinL, DobalianA. Pre-earthquake Burden of Illness and Postearthquake Health and Preparedness in Veterans. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(3):1-7.
Despite federal and local efforts to educate the public to prepare for major emergencies, many US households remain unprepared for such occurrences. United States Armed Forces veterans are at particular risk during public health emergencies as they are more likely than the general population to have multiple health conditions.
This study compares general levels of household emergency preparedness between veterans and nonveterans by focusing on seven surrogate measures of household emergency preparedness (a 3-day supply of food, water, and prescription medications, a battery-operated radio and flashlight, a written evacuation plan, and an expressed willingness to leave the community during a mandatory evacuation). This study used data from the 2006 through 2010 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a state representative, random sample of adults aged 18 and older living in 14 states.
The majority of veteran and nonveteran households had a 3-day supply of food (88% vs 82%, respectively) and prescription medications (95% vs 89%, respectively), access to a working, battery-operated radio (82% vs 77%, respectively) and flashlight (97% vs 95%, respectively), and were willing to leave the community during a mandatory evacuation (91% vs 96%, respectively). These populations were far less likely to have a 3-day supply of water (61% vs 52%, respectively) and a written evacuation plan (24% vs 21%, respectively). After adjusting for various sociodemographic covariates, general health status, and disability status, households with veterans were significantly more likely than households without veterans to have 3-day supplies of food, water, and prescription medications, and a written evacuation plan; less likely to indicate that they would leave their community during a mandatory evacuation; and equally likely to have a working, battery-operated radio and flashlight.
These findings suggest that veteran households appear to be better prepared for emergencies than do nonveteran households, although the lower expressed likelihood of veterans households to evacuate when ordered to do so may place them at a somewhat greater risk of harm during such events. Further research should examine household preparedness among other vulnerable groups including subgroups of veteran populations and the reasons why their preparedness may differ from the general population.
Der-MartirosianC, StrineT, AtiaM, ChuK, MitchellMN, DobalianA. General Household Emergency Preparedness: A Comparison Between Veterans and Nonveterans. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2014;29(2):1-7.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.