Concern exists that radiation exposure from computerized tomography (CT) will cause thousands of malignancies. Other experts share the same perspective regarding the risk from additional sources of low-dose ionizing radiation, such as the releases from Three Mile Island (1979; Pennsylvania USA) and Fukushima (2011; Okuma, Fukushima Prefecture, Japan) nuclear power plant disasters. If this premise is false, the fear of cancer leading patients and physicians to avoid CT scans and disaster responders to initiate forced evacuations is unfounded.

This investigation provides a quantitative evaluation of the methodologic quality of studies to determine the evidentiary strength supporting or refuting a causal relationship between low-dose radiation and cancer. It will assess the number of higher quality studies that support or question the role of low-dose radiation in oncogenesis.

This investigation is a systematic, methodologic review of articles published from 1975–2017 examining cancer risk from external low-dose x-ray and gamma radiation, defined as less than 200 millisievert (mSv). Following the PRISMA guidelines, the authors performed a search of the PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Methodologies of selected articles were scored using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) and a tool identifying 11 lower quality indicators. Manuscript methodologies were ranked as higher quality if they scored no lower than seven out of nine on the NOS and contained no more than two lower quality indicators. Investigators then characterized articles as supporting or not supporting a causal relationship between low-dose radiation and cancer.

Investigators identified 4,382 articles for initial review. A total of 62 articles met all inclusion/exclusion criteria and were evaluated in this study. Quantitative evaluation of the manuscripts’ methodologic strengths found 25 studies met higher quality criteria while 37 studies met lower quality criteria. Of the 25 studies with higher quality methods, 21 out of 25 did not support cancer induction by low-dose radiation (P = .0003).

A clear preponderance of articles with higher quality methods found no increased risk of cancer from low-dose radiation. The evidence suggests that exposure to multiple CT scans and other sources of low-dose radiation with a cumulative dose up to 100 mSv (approximately 10 scans), and possibly as high as 200 mSv (approximately 20 scans), does not increase cancer risk.

While the concept of community resilience is gaining traction, the role of spontaneous volunteers during the initial response to disasters remains controversial. In an attempt to resolve some of the debate, investigators examined the activities of a spontaneous volunteer group called Nafeer after the Sudan floods around the city of Khartoum in August of 2013.

Can spontaneous volunteers successfully initiate, coordinate, and deliver sustained assistance immediately after a disaster?

This retrospective, descriptive case study involved: (1) interviews with Nafeer members that participated in the disaster response to the Khartoum floods; (2) examination of documents generated during the event; and (3) subsequent benchmarking of their efforts with the Sphere Handbook. Members who agreed to participate were requested to provide all documents in their possession relating to Nafeer. The response by Nafeer was then benchmarked to the Sphere Handbook’s six core standards, as well as the 11 minimum standards in essential health services.

A total of 11 individuals were interviewed (six from leadership and five from active members). Nafeer’s activities included: food provision; delivery of basic health care; environmental sanitation campaigns; efforts to raise awareness; and construction and strengthening of flood barricades. Its use of electronic platforms and social media to collect data and coordinate the organization’s response was effective. Nafeer adopted a flat-management structure, dividing itself into 14 committees. A Coordination Committee was in charge of liaising between all committees. The Health and Sanitation Committee supervised two health days which included mobile medical and dentistry clinics supported by a mobile laboratory and pharmacy. The Engineering Committee managed to construct and maintain flood barricades. Nafeer used crowd-sourcing to fund its activities, receiving donations locally and internationally using supporters outside Sudan. Nafeer completely fulfilled three of Sphere’s core standards and partially fulfilled the other three, but none of the essential health services standards were fulfilled. Even though the Sphere Handbook was chosen as the best available “gold standard” to benchmark Nafeer’s efforts, it showed significant limitations in effectively measuring this group.

It appears that independent spontaneous volunteer initiatives, like Nafeer, potentially can improve community resilience and play a significant role in the humanitarian response. Such organizations should be the subject of increased research activity. Relevant bodies should consider issuing separate guidelines supporting spontaneous volunteer organizations.

AlbahariA, SchultzCH. A Qualitative Analysis of the Spontaneous Volunteer Response to the 2013 Sudan Floods: Changing the Paradigm. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2017;32(3):240–248.

The 2005 Gulf Coast hurricane season was one of the most costly and deadly in US history. Hurricane Rita stressed hospitals and led to multiple, simultaneous evacuations. This study systematically identified community factors associated with patient movement out of seven hospitals evacuated during Hurricane Rita.

This study represents the second of two systematic, observational, and retrospective investigations of seven acute care hospitals that reported off-site evacuations due to Hurricane Rita. Participants from each hospital included decision makers that comprised the Incident Management Team (IMT). Investigators applied a standardized interview process designed to assess evacuation factors related to external situational awareness of community activities during facility evacuation due to hurricanes. The measured outcomes were responses to 95 questions within six sections of the survey instrument.

Investigators identified two factors that significantly impacted hospital IMT decision making: (1) incident characteristics affecting a facility's internal resources and challenges; and (2) incident characteristics affecting a facility's external evacuation activities. This article summarizes the latter and reports the following critical decision making points: (1) Emergency Operations Plans (EOP) were activated an average of 85 hours (3 days, 13 hours) prior to Hurricane Rita's landfall; (2) the decision to evacuate the hospital was made an average of 30 hours (1 day, 6 hours) from activation of the EOP; and (3) the implementation of the evacuation process took an average of 22 hours. Coordination of patient evacuations was most complicated by transportation deficits (the most significant of the 11 identified problem areas) and a lack of situational awareness of community response activities. All evacuation activities and subsequent evacuation times were negatively impacted by an overall lack of understanding on the part of hospital staff and the IMT regarding how to identify and coordinate with community resources.

Hospital evacuation requires coordinated processes and resources, including situational awareness that reflects the condition of the community as a result of the incident. Successful hospital evacuation decision making is influenced by community-wide situational awareness and transportation deficits. Planning with the community to create realistic EOPs that accurately reflect available resources and protocols is critical to informing hospital decision making during a crisis. Knowledge of these factors could improve decision making and evacuation practices, potentially reducing evacuation times in future hurricanes.

DowneyEL, AndressK, SchultzCH. External Factors Impacting Hospital Evacuations Caused by Hurricane Rita: The Role of Situational Awareness. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2013;28(3):1-8.