Cargando…

UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION: System learning from major incidents is a crucial element of improving preparedness for response to any future incidents. Sharing good practice and limitations stimulates further actions to improve preparedness and prevents duplicating mistakes. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Skryabina, Elena, Betts, Naomi, Reedy, Gabriel, Riley, Paul, Amlôt, Richard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33177061
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-208966
_version_ 1784571974902611968
author Skryabina, Elena
Betts, Naomi
Reedy, Gabriel
Riley, Paul
Amlôt, Richard
author_facet Skryabina, Elena
Betts, Naomi
Reedy, Gabriel
Riley, Paul
Amlôt, Richard
author_sort Skryabina, Elena
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: System learning from major incidents is a crucial element of improving preparedness for response to any future incidents. Sharing good practice and limitations stimulates further actions to improve preparedness and prevents duplicating mistakes. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed methods study comprises data from responses to an online survey and individual interviews with healthcare staff who took part in the responses to three terrorist incidents in the UK in 2017 (Westminster Bridge attack, Manchester Arena Bombing and London Bridge attack) to understand limitations in the response and share good practices. RESULTS: The dedication of NHS staff, staff availability and effective team work were the most frequently mentioned enabling factors in the response. Effective coordination between teams and a functional major incident plan facilitated an effective response. Rapid access to blood products, by positioning the blood bank in the ED, treating children and parents together and sharing resources between trauma centres were recognised as very effective innovative practices. Recent health emergency preparedness exercises (HEPEs) were valued for preparing both Trusts and individual staff for the response. Challenges included communication between ambulance services and hospitals, difficulties with patient identification and tracking and managing the return to ‘normal’ work patterns post event. Lack of immediately available clinical protocols to deal with blast injuries was the most commonly mentioned clinical issue. The need for psychosocial support for responding and supporting staff was identified. DISCUSSION: Between-agencies communication and information sharing appear as the most common recurring problems in mass casualty incidents (MCIs). Recent HEPEs, which allowed teams, interdisciplinary groups, and different agencies to practice responding to similar simulated incidents, were important and informed actions during the real response. Immediate and delayed psychosocial support should be in place for healthcare staff responding to MCIs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8461407
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84614072021-10-08 UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study Skryabina, Elena Betts, Naomi Reedy, Gabriel Riley, Paul Amlôt, Richard Emerg Med J Original Research INTRODUCTION: System learning from major incidents is a crucial element of improving preparedness for response to any future incidents. Sharing good practice and limitations stimulates further actions to improve preparedness and prevents duplicating mistakes. METHODS: This convergent parallel mixed methods study comprises data from responses to an online survey and individual interviews with healthcare staff who took part in the responses to three terrorist incidents in the UK in 2017 (Westminster Bridge attack, Manchester Arena Bombing and London Bridge attack) to understand limitations in the response and share good practices. RESULTS: The dedication of NHS staff, staff availability and effective team work were the most frequently mentioned enabling factors in the response. Effective coordination between teams and a functional major incident plan facilitated an effective response. Rapid access to blood products, by positioning the blood bank in the ED, treating children and parents together and sharing resources between trauma centres were recognised as very effective innovative practices. Recent health emergency preparedness exercises (HEPEs) were valued for preparing both Trusts and individual staff for the response. Challenges included communication between ambulance services and hospitals, difficulties with patient identification and tracking and managing the return to ‘normal’ work patterns post event. Lack of immediately available clinical protocols to deal with blast injuries was the most commonly mentioned clinical issue. The need for psychosocial support for responding and supporting staff was identified. DISCUSSION: Between-agencies communication and information sharing appear as the most common recurring problems in mass casualty incidents (MCIs). Recent HEPEs, which allowed teams, interdisciplinary groups, and different agencies to practice responding to similar simulated incidents, were important and informed actions during the real response. Immediate and delayed psychosocial support should be in place for healthcare staff responding to MCIs. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-10 2020-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC8461407/ /pubmed/33177061 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-208966 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Skryabina, Elena
Betts, Naomi
Reedy, Gabriel
Riley, Paul
Amlôt, Richard
UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title_full UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title_fullStr UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title_full_unstemmed UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title_short UK healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
title_sort uk healthcare staff experiences and perceptions of a mass casualty terrorist incident response: a mixed-methods study
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8461407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33177061
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/emermed-2019-208966
work_keys_str_mv AT skryabinaelena ukhealthcarestaffexperiencesandperceptionsofamasscasualtyterroristincidentresponseamixedmethodsstudy
AT bettsnaomi ukhealthcarestaffexperiencesandperceptionsofamasscasualtyterroristincidentresponseamixedmethodsstudy
AT reedygabriel ukhealthcarestaffexperiencesandperceptionsofamasscasualtyterroristincidentresponseamixedmethodsstudy
AT rileypaul ukhealthcarestaffexperiencesandperceptionsofamasscasualtyterroristincidentresponseamixedmethodsstudy
AT amlotrichard ukhealthcarestaffexperiencesandperceptionsofamasscasualtyterroristincidentresponseamixedmethodsstudy