Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zlgnt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T11:50:26.781Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Use of Trained Observers as an Evaluation Tool for a Multi-Hospital Bioterrorism Exercise

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 June 2012

Kelly R. Klein ,
Dale C. Brandenburg ,
Jenny G. Atas  and
Ann Maher
Kelly R. Klein*
Affiliation:
Weapons of Mass Destruction1/Disaster Medicine/Emergency Medical Service Fellow, Department ofEmergency Medicine, Wayne State University/MichiganDepartment of Community Health, Detroit, MI, USA
Dale C. Brandenburg
Affiliation:
Workplace Education and Training, Professor of Research Instructional Technology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI USA
Jenny G. Atas
Affiliation:
Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI USA
Ann Maher
Affiliation:
Region 2 South, Bioterrorism Coordinator, Detroit, MI USA
*
4160 John RSuite 616Detroit, MI 48201USA E-mail: KKlein@dmc.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Introduction:

Evidence suggests that regular disaster exercises have beneficial effects on subsequent mock and actual disaster responses. The purpose of this report is to describe a multiple hospital, bioterrorism exercise, evaluated by independent observers who used an evaluation template.

Methods:

The overall tabletop exercise design included participation from 23 Joint Commission Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations hospitals, four health departments, and a representative from one federal agency. The exercise was evaluated by trained exercise observers utilizing an independently prepared, evaluation protocol.

Results:

All exercise sites successfully identified the bio-agent involved and answered after-exercise debriefing questions without much difficulty. Evaluations, in the form of an after-action report by the independent observers, commented upon the many limitations to the construct of the exercise.

Conclusion:

Having an independent observer group at the exercise appeared to provide a value-added benefitfor capturing subjective information and data. However, these data were not in a form conducive to statisticalanalysis. Further work is needed to create an evaluation tool that would allow for statistical analysis so that exercises can be compared and improvements can be objective.

Keywords

bioterrorismemergency medical services (EMS)evaluationexerciseHospital Emergency Incident Command System (HEICS)observers

Information

Type
Original Research
Information
Prehospital and Disaster Medicine , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , June 2005 , pp. 159 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Auf der Heide, E: Designing a disaster plan: Important questions. Plant Technologyand Safety Management 1984;3:7–18.Google Scholar
2.Auf der Heide, E: Disaster planning, part II: Disaster Problems, issues, and challenges identified in the research literature. In: Morres, CA, Burkle, FM, Lillbridge, SR (eds): Emergency Medicine Clinics of North America. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1996, pp 453–480.Google Scholar
3.Dynes, RR, Quarantelli, EL, Kreps, GA: A Perspective on Disaster Planning, 3rd ed, Report Series 11, Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware, Newark, 1981.Google Scholar
4.Dynes, RD: Community emergency planning: False assumptions and inappropriate analogies. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 1994;12:141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Auf der Heide, E: Principles of hospital disaster planning. In: Hogan, DE, Burstein, JL (eds): Disaster Medicine. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins. 2002, pp 57–59.Google Scholar
6.Beaton, RD, Stevermer, A, Wicklund, J, et al. : Evaluation of the Washington State National Pharmaceutical Stockpile Dispensing Exercise, part IIDispensary site workerfindings. Journal Public Health Management Practice 2004;10(1):77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Green, GB, Modi, S, Lunney, K, Thomas, TL: Generic Evaluation Methods for Disaster Exercises in Developing Countries. Annals of Emergency Medicine 2003;41:689–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.O'Toole, T, Mair, M, Inglesby, TV: Shining light on “dark winter”. Clinical Infectious Diseases 2002;34:972–983.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9. US Department of Transportation: Developing a hazardous materials exercise program: A handbook for state and local officials. Available at http://ww.ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/254.html. Accessed 06 January 2004.Google Scholar
10. Office of Domestic Preparedness: Homeland security exercise and evaluation program, Volume I: Overview and doctrine. Available at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/HSEEPv1.pdf. Accessed 24 October 2004.Google Scholar
11.Auf der Heide, E: Disaster Response: Principles of Preparation and Coordination. St. Louis, MO: CV. Mosby; 1989.Google Scholar
12. Office for Domestic Preparedness: Homeland security exercises and evaluation program, Volume 2. Available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/docs/HSEEPv2.pdf. Accessed 24 October 2004.Google Scholar