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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |