Methodology

Hanni Stoklosa, Courtney Julia Burns, Abraar Karan, Michelle Lyman, Nathene Morley, Reena Tadee, and Eric Goodwin. 6/2021. “Mitigating trafficking of migrants and children through disaster risk reduction: Insights from the Thailand flood.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. Read PublicationAbstract

Thailand's flood of 2011 was devastating for the communities and inhabitants of the country, affecting approximately 13 million people and causing damages totaling THB 1.43 trillion (46.5 billion USD). The presence of a natural hazards disaster such as this can magnify individuals' vulnerability to human trafficking, or mitigate it depending on the disaster risk reduction practices of the surrounding community. The Sendai Framework is the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction's international framework for these situations, outlining targets and priorities for action to reduce negative outcomes, such as trafficking, from natural events. This study aimed to understand how a disaster risk reduction and preparedness lens, based on the Sendai Framework, in the context of the humanitarian response to this 2011 flood, could inform human trafficking prevention efforts for future disasters. Qualitative methodology, utilizing a content analysis approach, was employed. It was found that migrant workers and children were at the greatest risk for trafficking, and resiliency efforts by communities and families, in conjunction with coordinated initiatives by NGOs and the government, were essential in preserving individuals' well-being. Further, the Sendai Framework is a promising tool to address these areas of disaster response in which the windows of opportunity for traffickers can be closed and those at high trafficking risk can be protected. As disasters continue to occur, there remains a strong need to bring forth a more systematic disaster risk reduction and resilience-enhancing approach to trafficking prevention.

Asha Devereaux, Holly Yang, Gilbert Seda, Viji Sankar, Ryan C. Maves, Navaz Karanjia, John Scott Parrish, Christy Rosenberg, Paula Goodman-Crews, Lynette Cederquist, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., Jennifer Tuteur, Chiara Leroy, and Kristi L. Koenig. 9/2020. “Optimizing Scarce Resource Allocation During COVID-19: Rapid Creation of a Regional Health-Care Coalition and Triage Teams in San Diego County, California.” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. Read PublicationAbstract

Successful management of an event where healthcare needs exceed regional healthcare capacity requires coordinated strategies for scarce resource allocation. Publications for rapid development, training, and coordination of regional hospital triage teams manage the allocation of scarce resources during COVID-19 are lacking. Over a period of 3 weeks, over 100 clinicians, ethicists, leaders, and public health authorities convened virtually to achieve consensus on how best to save the most lives possible and share resources. This is referred to as population-based crisis management. The rapid regionalization of 22 acute care hospitals across 4500 square miles in the midst of a pandemic with a shifting regulatory landscape was challenging, but overcome by mutual trust, transparency, and confidence in the public health authority. Because many cities are facing COVID-19 surges, we share a process for successful rapid formation of healthcare care coalitions, Crisis Standard of Care, and training of Triage Teams. Incorporation of continuous process improvement and methods for communication is essential for successful implementation. Utilization of our regional healthcare coalition communications, incident command system, and the crisis care committee helped mitigate crisis care in the San Diego and Imperial County region as COVID-19 cases surged and scarce resource collaborative decisions were required.

Amir Khorram-Manesh and Frederick M. Burkle Jr. 10/2020. “Sustainability Editorial Disasters and Public Health Emergencies-Current Perspectives in Preparedness and Response.” Sustainability. Read PublicationAbstract

Disasters and public health emergencies are inevitable and can happen anywhere and anytime. However, they can be mitigated and their impacts can be minimized by utilizing appropriate measures in all four different phases of disaster management, i.e., mitigation and prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. Several factors are crucial for achieving successful disaster management. In the mitigation and preparation phase, all risks should be reviewed and new ones should be added and analyzed carefully to propose proper solutions and plans. In the preparedness phase, the ability and knowledge of each organization and all individuals in the management system should be tested and evaluated to ensure good readiness in responding to an emergency. Furthermore, plans should be available at all levels of the emergency chain of action to cope with all issues in the response and recovery phases [1,2]. This Issue of Sustainability aimed to cover emergency and public health crisis management from a multiagency perspective, by discussing lessons learned, introducing new ideas about flexible surge capacity, and showing the way it can practice multiagency collaboration.

Krzysztof Goniewicz, Mariusz Goniewicz, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., and Amir Khorram-Manesh. 1/2021. “Cohort research analysis of disaster experience, preparedness, and competency-based training among nurses.” PLoS ONE. Read PublicationAbstract

Introduction: It is expected that in unforeseen situations, nurses will provide appropriate medical interventions, using their expertise and skills to reduce the risks associated with the consequences of disasters. Consequently, it is crucial that they are properly prepared to respond to such difficult circumstances. This study aimed to identify the factors influencing the basic competences of nurses in disasters.

Materials and methods: The survey was directed to 468 nurses from all medical centres in Lublin. IBM SPSS Statistics version 23 was used for statistical analyses, frequency analysis, basic descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis. The classical statistical significance level was adopted as α = 0.05.

Results: Based on the logistic regression analysis, it was found that work experience, workplace preparedness, as well as training and experience in disaster response are important predictors of preparedness.

Conclusions: These findings indicate that the nurses' core competencies for these incidents can be improved through education and training programmes which increase their preparedness for disasters. Nurses are among the most important groups of healthcare professionals facing a disaster and should be involved in all phases of disaster management, such as risk assessment and pre-disaster planning, response during crisis situations and risks’ mitigation throughout the reconstruction period.

Attila J. Hertelendy, Gregory R. Ciottone, Cheryl L. Mitchell, Jennifer Gutberg, and Frederick M. Burkle Jr. 8/2020. “Crisis Standards of Care in a Pandemic: Navigating the Ethical, Clinical, Psychological, and Policy-making Maelstrom.” International Journal for Quality in Health Care.Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused clinicians at the frontlines to confront difficult decisions regarding resource allocation, treatment options, and ultimately the life-saving measures that must be taken at the point of care. This article addresses the importance of enacting Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) as a policy mechanism to facilitate the shift to population-based medicine. In times of emergencies and crises such as this pandemic, the enactment of CSC enables concrete decisions to be made by governments relating to supply chains, resource allocation, and provision of care to maximize societal benefit. This shift from an individual to a population-based societal focus has profound consequences on how clinical decisions are made at the point of care. Failing to enact CSC may have psychological impacts for healthcare providers particularly related to moral distress, through an inability to fully enact individual beliefs (individually-focused clinical decisions) which form their moral compass.

Alan Parnell, Krzysztof Goniewicz, Amir Khorram-Manesh, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., Ahmed Al-Wathinani, and Attila J. Hertelendy. 8/2020. “COVID-19 a health reform catalyst? -Analyzing single-payer options in the U.S.: Considering economic values, recent proposals, and existing models from abroad.” Journal of Hospital Administration.Abstract

The United States has continued to face severe health coverage and spending challenges that have been attributed to a fragmented multi-payer and fee-for-service delivery system which has become even more exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Legislators and healthcare professionals have tried to answer the challenges faced by the U.S. health system through the introduction of several state and federal proposals for a "Medicare-for-all" like system, which have failed to be adopted likely due to the lack of consideration for free-market economic values. Looking to existing models abroad can provide the U.S. with different ways to understand how to achieve the benefits of single-payer models with universal coverage while maintaining the integrity of free-market values. The health systems in wealthy, industrialized countries are closely referenced in this article because of the variation of methods in which each achieves a single-payer/universal coverage model as well as the contrast in their health outcomes compared to that of the U.S. The biggest considerations for any reform effort to achieve an efficient single-payer system with universal coverage is the maintenance of private health insurers and the degree to which expanded government influence would be accepted. The future state of health care remains uncertain and unstable as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, therefore a window of opportunity exists now for leveraging this uncertainty to achieve reform.

Frederick M. Burkle Jr. 7/2020. Robert Fox Interview with Frederick M. Burkle on Population-based Triage Management.Abstract
Interview: At first sight, Population-based Triage, PBT for short, isn't the most enticing social formula-but it may be the key to how the UK manages the next stages of the current Corona quagmire-and prepare for the next one, when and not if it happens. It could, and probably should, become standard operating procedure in public health population-based management decisions in the outbreak of widespread pestilence and disease. We need that new Public Health Strategy now. Under the PBT plan the population as a whole is treated to the triage technique familiar in accident and emergency, and battlefield medicine. Medical and rescue teams concentrate on treating the salvageable in preference to those most likely to die. "Traditional health care systems care systems care for patients individually, while public health is caring for an entire population," says Professor Frederick Burkle, Senior Scholar and Scientist of Public Health at Harvard. He published his plan for a population-based approach to pandemic in 2006. It was used in the major desk-top exercise by Public Health England for tackling a major influenza pandemic, Operation Cygnus, in 2016. The report partly adopted the professor's clear-eyed approach to running a major pandemic operation, but left many questions open. If they had been addressed in the present Covid crisis, thousands of lives might have bene saved. Much the same goes for Exercise Isis carried out by National Health Scotland in 2018, focused on a major outbreak of MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome). The lessons of both exercises have been taken aboard, according to Matt Hancock, but as they say in Scots law, it looks like a case of not proven. Both the Cygnus and Isis reports of 2017 and 2018 cannot conceal the serious shortcomings in preparation against a major public health emergency. The Cygnus exercise, for instance concentrates on the role of the Local Resilience Forums in coordinating emergency services-yet the representatives of the eight LRFs were explicit about their lack of resources. The LRFs have proved vital since March, but they have no statutory powers and no funding. More ominously the Isis report for the Scottish Health flags up the lack of availability of protective equipment-PPE-for a nationwide viral outbreak. The problem of managing a workable Public Health Emergency strategy for this coronavirus crisis is brilliantly illustrated BBC1's drama documentary, The Salisbury Poisonings. It tells the real events of the attack by the nerve agent Novichok on the Skripals in Salisbury two years ago. The heroine is the Wiltshire Public Health Officer Tracy.
Krzysztof Goniewicz, Beata Osiak, Witold Pawłowski, Robert Czerski, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., Dorota Lasota, and Mariusz Goniewicz. 7/2020. “Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response in Poland: Prevention, Surveillance, and Mitigation Planning.” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness.Abstract

Objectives: Biological weapons are one of the oldest weapons of mass destruction used by man. Their use has not only determined the outcome of battles, but also influenced the fate of entire civilizations. Although the use of biological weapons agents in a terrorist attack is currently unlikely, all services responsible for the surveillance and removal of epidemiological threats must have clear guidelines and emergency response plans.

Methods: In the face of the numerous threats appearing in the world, it has become necessary to put the main emphasis on modernizing, securing, and maintaining structures in the field of medicine which are prepared for unforeseen crises and situations related to the use of biological agents.

Results: This article presents Poland’s current preparation to take action in the event of a bioterrorist threat. The study presents both the military aspect and procedures for dealing with contamination.

Conclusions: In Poland, as in other European Union countries fighting terrorism, preparations should be made to defend against biological attacks, improve the flow of information on the European security system, strengthen research centers, train staff, create observation units and vaccination centers, as well as prepare hospitals for the hospitalization of patients—potential victims of bioterrorist attacks.

Eric Weinstein, Luca Ragazzoni, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., Mea Allen, David Hogan, and Francesco Della Corte. 5/2020. “Delayed Primary and Specialty Care: The Coronavirus Disease-2019 Pandemic Second Wave.” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness.Abstract

Time is of the essence to continue the pandemic disaster cycle with a comprehensive post-COVID-19 health care delivery system RECOVERY analysis, plan and operation at the local, regional and state level. The second wave of COVID-19 pandemic response are not the ripples of acute COVID-19 patient clusters that will persist until a vaccine strategy is designed and implemented to effect herd immunity. The COVID-19 second wave are the patients that have had their primary and specialty care delayed. This exponential wave of patients requires prompt health care delivery system planning and response.

Frederick M. Burkle Jr. and Asha V. Devereaux. 5/2020. “50 States or 50 Countries: What Did We Miss and What Do We Do Now?” Prehospital and Disaster Medicine.Abstract

There have been multiple inconsistencies in the manner the COVID-19 pandemic has been investigated and managed by countries. Population-based management (PBM) has been inconsistent, yet serves as a necessary first step in managing public health crises. Unfortunately, these have dominated the landscape within the United States and continue as of this writing. Political and economic influences have greatly influenced major public health management and control decisions. Responsibility for global public health crises and modeling for management are the responsibility of the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Health Regulations Treaty (IHR). This review calls upon both to reassess their roles and responsibilities that must be markedly improved and better replicated world-wide in order to optimize the global public health protections and its PBM. 

Krzysztof Goniewicz, Maciej Magiera, Dorota Rucińska, Witold Pawłowski, Frederick M. Burkle Jr., Attila J. Hertelendy, and Mariusz Goniewicz. 5/2020. “Geographic Information System Technology: Review of the Challenges for Its Establishment as a Major Asset for Disaster and Emergency Management in Poland.” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness.Abstract

Technical and technological progress in the 21st century, especially emerging geographic information system (GIS) technology, offers new and unprecedented opportunities to counteract the impact of crisis situations and emergencies. Computerization and development of GIS enabled the digital visualization of space for interactive analysis of multiple data in the form of models or simulations. Additionally, computerization, which gives rise to a new quality of database management, requires continuous modernization of computer hardware and software. This study examines selected examples of the implications and impact of the GIS commonly used in Poland.

Frederick M. Burkle Jr. 3/2020. “Opportunities Lost: Political Interference in the Systematic Collection of Population Health Data During and After the 2003 War in Iraq.” Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness.Abstract

The review of the article, “Developing a Public Health Monitoring System in a War-torn Region: A Field Report from Iraqi Kurdistan,” prompted the writing of this commentary. Decisions to implement health data systems within Iraq require exploration of many otherwise undisclosed or unknown historical facts that led to the politicization of and ultimate demise of the pre-2003 Iraq war systematic health data monitoring system designed to mitigate both direct and indirect mortality and morbidity. Absent from the field report’s otherwise accurate history leading up to and following the war is the politically led process by which the original surveillance system planned for the war and its aftermath was destroyed. The successful politicization of the otherwise extensively planned for public health monitoring in 2003 and its legacy harmed any future attempts to implement similar monitoring systems in succeeding wars and conflicts. Warring factions only collect military casualty data. The field report outlines current attempts to begin again in building a systematic health monitoring system emphasizing it is the “only way to manage the complex post-war events that continue to lead to disproportionate preventable mortality and morbidity.”

Pages