“Mass casualty management (Rana Plaza Tragedy) in secondary military hospital-anesthesiologist experience: case study”

Major challenges in the management of mass casualty have been identified as lack of human resources, lack of material resources, lack of communication and co-ordination. Our hospital has limited resources of manpower and disposable items. The Departments of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care have been seriously disrupted by the influx of 155 severely injured patients following the collapse of a nine storey building. Such a large, instantaneous influx of injured citizens would overwhelm even the most well resourced health care system. A multidisciplinary team approach was planned to manage the casualties. Senior anaesthesiologists took responsibility for the organisation of different staff members into medical triage team, an immediate care team, an urgent care team, a non-urgent care team and a clerical team. Different teams have accomplished casualty management by addressing four principal issues (the assessment of available resources; ensuring critical but limited care; stocking up on medicine and equipment for the patient surge; and tough rationing of decisions). Assessments of available resources were done by emphasising three #8216;S’s – staff (human resources), stuff (material resources) and structure. Additional human resources (anaesthesiologists, orthopaedic surgeons etc.) and material resources (#8216;H’ type oxygen cylinders, intravenous fluid etc.) were reinforced from nearby hospitals. Additional influxes of critical patients were supported in the postoperative ward and recovery rooms without any monitoring devices. A surgical dressing room without any basic monitoring device was used as an operating room. To do the greatest good for the greatest number of patients, we restricted ourselves to providing “essential rather than limitless critical care”. “Stocking up on medicine and equipment resources” on assessment of the constraints in managing the patient surge, was the next essential step in the management of the casualty load. Patients with life-limiting illnesses were excluded from receiving scarce critical care resources. Thus “Tough rationing of decision” was also an important element. Although the patients that were managed were not large in number, a consideration of the setup with a limited workforce and modern equipment and management experience of a mass casualty addressing the four principal issues in our department, might also help other departments in managing such events.