Pediatric trauma is one of the leading causes of child mortality and morbidity and is a major challenge for healthcare systems worldwide. Treatment of pediatric trauma requires special attention according to the unique needs of children, especially in children affected by severe trauma who require life-saving treatments. It is essential to examine the preparedness of Emergency Departments (EDs) for admitting and treating pediatric casualties.

To develop a model for admitting and treating pediatric trauma casualties in EDs.

Seventeen health professionals were interviewed using a semi-structured qualitative tool. A quantitative questionnaire was distributed among general and pediatric EDs’ medical and nursing staff. Following the qualitative and quantitative findings, another round of interviews was performed to identify constraints, to construct a “Current Reality Tree,” and develop a model for admission and management of pediatric casualties in EDs. The model was validated by the National Council for Trauma and Emergency Medicine.

Lack of uniformity was found regarding age limit and levels of injury of pediatric patients. Most study participants believe that severe pediatric casualties should be concentrated in designated medical centers and that minor and major pediatric casualties should be treated in pediatric rather that general EDs. Pediatric emergency medicine specialists are preferred as case managers for pediatric casualties. Significant diversity in pediatric-care training was found. Based on qualitative and quantitative findings, a model for the optimal admitting and managing of pediatric casualties was designed.

To provide the best care for pediatric casualties and regulate its key aspects, clear statutory guidelines should be formulated at national and local levels. The model developed in this study considers EDs’ medical teams and policy leaders’ perceptions, and hence its significant contribution. Implementation of the findings and their integration in pediatric trauma care in EDs can significantly improve pediatric emergency medical services.

Hospitals are required to maintain emergency preparedness 24/7. In order to maintain readiness, Israeli hospitals operate Emergency Committees comprised of medical, nursing, and administrative professionals who are responsible for capacity building including the development of plans, infrastructure, equipment, training, crisis management, and learning lessons. The Ministry of Health (MOH) and Home Front Command (HFC) conduct a comprehensive, structured evaluation of emergency preparedness in every hospital every two to three years.

To assess the impact of a periodical evaluation on levels of emergency preparedness over time in a level one trauma center.

Evaluation of emergency preparedness is conducted by approximately 12 evaluators from the MOH and HFC, encompassing mass casualty incidents (MCIs), mass toxicological/chemical incidents (MTEs), radiological and biological events, earthquakes and conflicts. Evaluations are based on objective parameters, relayed to hospitals prior to the evaluation. The hospital’s level of emergency preparedness is graded and improvements that must be implemented are delineated. The grades of four evaluations conducted from 2011 to 2018 were compared to identify trends in preparedness.

Mean levels of emergency preparedness in the 2018 versus 2011 evaluations presented an increase concerning all threats, including MCIs (92 vs. 90), MTEs (99 vs. 77, respectively), biological events (96 vs. 73, respectively), radiological events (91 vs. 79), earthquakes (87 vs. 60, respectively), and conflicts (95 vs. 74). The relative change in levels of preparedness was more noted concerning biological events and earthquakes.

A periodical evaluation by governing authorities seems to motivate the hospital’s administrations to invest efforts in building and maintain a high level of emergency preparedness. Systematic evaluations conducted bi-annually contributed to improved readiness for diverse emergency scenarios, including for threats that less frequently materialize.

Rapid response to a trauma incident is vital for saving lives. However, in a mass casualty incident (MCI), there may not be enough resources (first responders and equipment) to adequately triage, prepare, and evacuate every injured person. To address this deficit, a Volunteer First Responder (VFR) program was established.

This paper describes the organizational structure and roles of the VFR program, outlines the geographical distribution of volunteers, and evaluates response times to 3 MCIs for both ambulance services and VFRs in 2000 and 2016.

When mapped, the spatial distribution of VFRs and ambulance stations closely and deliberately reflects the population distribution of Israel. We found that VFRs were consistently first to arrive at the scene of an MCI and greatly increased the number of personnel available to assist with MCI management in urban, suburban, and rural settings.

The VFR program provides an important and effective life-saving resource to supplement emergency first response. Given the known importance of rapid response to trauma, VFRs likely contribute to reduced trauma mortality, although further research is needed in order to examine this question specifically. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:287–294)

The study aimed to examine impact of think-tanks designed to create policies for emerging threats on medical teams’ perceptions of individual and systemic emergency preparedness.

Multi-professional think-tanks were established to design policies for potential attacks on civilian communities. In total, 59 multi-sector health care managers participated in think-tanks focused on: (a) primary care services in risk zones; (b) hospital care; (c) casualty evacuation policies; (d) medical services to special-needs populations; and (e) services in a “temporary military-closed zone.” Participants rotated systematically between think-tanks. Perceived individual and systemic emergency preparedness was reviewed pre-post participation in think-tanks.

A significant increase in perceived emergency preparedness pre-post-think-tanks was found in 8/10 elements including in perceived individual role proficiency (3.71±0.67 vs 4.60±0.53, respectively; P<0.001) and confidence in colleagues’ proficiency during crisis (3.56±0.75 vs 4.37±0.61, respectively; P<0.001). Individual preparedness and role perception correlates with systemic preparedness and proficiency in risk assessment.

Participation in policy-making impacts on individuals’ perceptions of empowerment including trust in colleagues’ capacities, but does not increase confidence in a system’s preparedness. Field and managerial officials should be involved in policy-making processes, as a means to empower health care managers and improve interfaces and self-efficacy that are relevant to preparedness and response for crises. (Disaster Med Public Health Prepardness. 2019;13:152–157)

Inappropriate distribution of casualties in mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) may overwhelm hospitals. This study aimed to review the consequences of evacuating casualties from a bus accident to a single peripheral hospital and lessons learned regarding policy of casualty evacuation.

Medical records of all casualties relating to evacuation times, injury severity, diagnoses, treatments, resources utilized and outcomes were independently reviewed by two senior trauma surgeons. In addition, four senior trauma surgeons reviewed impact of treatment provided on patient outcomes. They reviewed the times for the primary and secondary evacuation, injury severity, diagnoses, surgical treatments, resources utilized, and the final outcomes of the patients at the point of discharge from the tertiary care hospital.

Thirty-one survivors were transferred to the closest local hospital; four died en route to hospital or within 30 minutes of arrival. Twenty-seven casualties were evacuated by air from the local hospital within 2.5 to 6.15 hours to Level I and II hospitals. Undertriage of 15% and overtriage of seven percent were noted. Four casualties did not receive treatment that might have improved their condition at the local hospital.

In MCIs occurring in remote areas, policy makers should consider revising the current evacuation plan so that only immediate unstable casualties should be transferred to the closest primary hospital. On site Advanced Life Support (ALS) should be administered to non-severe casualties until they can be evacuated directly to tertiary care hospitals. First responders must be trained to provide ALS to non-severe casualties until evacuation resources are available.

AdiniB, CohenR, GlassbergE, AzariaB, SimonD, SteinM, KleinY, PelegK. Reconsidering Policy of Casualty Evacuation in a Remote Mass-Casualty Incident. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(6):1-5.