Cargando…
Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events
Objective: Effective response to biological events necessitates ongoing evaluation of preparedness. This study was a bilateral German–Israeli collaboration aimed at developing an evaluation tool for assessing preparedness of medical facilities for biological events. Methods: Measurable parameters we...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3995059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24783192 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00035 |
_version_ | 1782312817799462912 |
---|---|
author | Adini, Bruria Verbeek, Luzie Trapp, Susanna Schilling, Stefan Sasse, Julia Pientka, Kathrin Böddinghaus, Boris Schaefer, Helene Schempf, Jörg Brodt, Reinhard Wegner, Christian Lev, Boaz Laor, Daniel Gottschalk, Rene Biederbick, Walter |
author_facet | Adini, Bruria Verbeek, Luzie Trapp, Susanna Schilling, Stefan Sasse, Julia Pientka, Kathrin Böddinghaus, Boris Schaefer, Helene Schempf, Jörg Brodt, Reinhard Wegner, Christian Lev, Boaz Laor, Daniel Gottschalk, Rene Biederbick, Walter |
author_sort | Adini, Bruria |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: Effective response to biological events necessitates ongoing evaluation of preparedness. This study was a bilateral German–Israeli collaboration aimed at developing an evaluation tool for assessing preparedness of medical facilities for biological events. Methods: Measurable parameters were identified through a literature review for inclusion in the evaluation tool and disseminated to 228 content experts in two modified Delphi cycles. Focus groups were conducted to identify psychosocial needs of the medical teams. Table-top and functional exercises were implemented to review applicability of the tool. Results: One hundred seventeen experts from Germany and Israel participated in the modified Delphi. Out of 188 parameters that were identified, 183 achieved a consensus of >75% of the content experts. Following comments recommended in the Delphi cycles, and feedback from focus groups and hospital exercises, the final tool consisted of 172 parameters. Median level of importance of each parameter was calculated based on ranking recommended in the Delphi process. Computerized web-based software was developed to calculate scores of preparedness for biological events. Conclusion: Ongoing evaluation means, such as the tool developed in the study, can facilitate the need for a valid and reliable mechanism that may be widely adopted and implemented as quality assurance measures. The tool is based on measurable parameters and indicators that can effectively present strengths and weaknesses in managing a response to a public health threat, and accordingly, steps can be implemented to improve readiness. Adoption of such a tool is an important component of assuring public health and effective emergency management. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3995059 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39950592014-04-29 Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events Adini, Bruria Verbeek, Luzie Trapp, Susanna Schilling, Stefan Sasse, Julia Pientka, Kathrin Böddinghaus, Boris Schaefer, Helene Schempf, Jörg Brodt, Reinhard Wegner, Christian Lev, Boaz Laor, Daniel Gottschalk, Rene Biederbick, Walter Front Public Health Public Health Objective: Effective response to biological events necessitates ongoing evaluation of preparedness. This study was a bilateral German–Israeli collaboration aimed at developing an evaluation tool for assessing preparedness of medical facilities for biological events. Methods: Measurable parameters were identified through a literature review for inclusion in the evaluation tool and disseminated to 228 content experts in two modified Delphi cycles. Focus groups were conducted to identify psychosocial needs of the medical teams. Table-top and functional exercises were implemented to review applicability of the tool. Results: One hundred seventeen experts from Germany and Israel participated in the modified Delphi. Out of 188 parameters that were identified, 183 achieved a consensus of >75% of the content experts. Following comments recommended in the Delphi cycles, and feedback from focus groups and hospital exercises, the final tool consisted of 172 parameters. Median level of importance of each parameter was calculated based on ranking recommended in the Delphi process. Computerized web-based software was developed to calculate scores of preparedness for biological events. Conclusion: Ongoing evaluation means, such as the tool developed in the study, can facilitate the need for a valid and reliable mechanism that may be widely adopted and implemented as quality assurance measures. The tool is based on measurable parameters and indicators that can effectively present strengths and weaknesses in managing a response to a public health threat, and accordingly, steps can be implemented to improve readiness. Adoption of such a tool is an important component of assuring public health and effective emergency management. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3995059/ /pubmed/24783192 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00035 Text en Copyright © 2014 Adini, Verbeek, Trapp, Schilling, Sasse, Pientka, Böddinghaus, Schaefer, Schempf, Brodt, Wegner, Lev, Laor, Gottschalk and Biederbick. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Public Health Adini, Bruria Verbeek, Luzie Trapp, Susanna Schilling, Stefan Sasse, Julia Pientka, Kathrin Böddinghaus, Boris Schaefer, Helene Schempf, Jörg Brodt, Reinhard Wegner, Christian Lev, Boaz Laor, Daniel Gottschalk, Rene Biederbick, Walter Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title | Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title_full | Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title_fullStr | Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title_full_unstemmed | Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title_short | Continued Vigilance – Development of an Online Evaluation Tool for Assessing Preparedness of Medical Facilities for Biological Events |
title_sort | continued vigilance – development of an online evaluation tool for assessing preparedness of medical facilities for biological events |
topic | Public Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3995059/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24783192 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2014.00035 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT adinibruria continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT verbeekluzie continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT trappsusanna continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT schillingstefan continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT sassejulia continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT pientkakathrin continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT boddinghausboris continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT schaeferhelene continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT schempfjorg continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT brodtreinhard continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT wegnerchristian continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT levboaz continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT laordaniel continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT gottschalkrene continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents AT biederbickwalter continuedvigilancedevelopmentofanonlineevaluationtoolforassessingpreparednessofmedicalfacilitiesforbiologicalevents |