Crisis Standards of Care Implementation at the State Level in the United States

被引:6
|
作者
Margus, Colton [1 ]
Sarin, Ritu R. [2 ,3 ]
Molloy, Michael [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Ciottone, Gregory R. [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Icahn Sch Med, Mt Sinai St Lukes Roosevelt, Dept Emergency Med, New York, NY USA
[2] Harvard Med Sch, Dept Emergency Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Emergency Med, Disaster Med, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[4] Univ Coll Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
关键词
crisis standards of care; disaster medicine; emergency medicine; pandemic planning; public health preparedness; PANDEMIC INFLUENZA; DISASTERS; PREPAREDNESS;
D O I
10.1017/S1049023X20001089
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Introduction: In 2009, the Institute of Medicine published guidelines for implementation of Crisis Standards of Care (CSC) at the state level in the United States (US). Based in part on the then concern for H1N1 pandemic, there was a recognized need for additional planning at the state level to maintain health system preparedness and conventional care standards when available resources become scarce. Despite the availability of this framework, in the years since and despite repeated large-scale domestic events, implementation remains mixed. Problem: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) rejuvenates concern for how health systems can maintain quality care when faced with unrelenting burden. This study seeks to outline which states in the US have developed CSC and which areas of care have thus far been addressed. Methods: An online search was conducted for all 50 states in 2015 and again in 2020. For states without CSC plans online, state officials were contacted by email and phone. Public protocols were reviewed to assess for operational implementation capabilities, specifically highlighting guidance on ventilator use, burn management, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, pediatric standards, and reliance on influenza planning. Results: Thirty-six states in the US were actively developing (17) or had already developed (19) official CSC guidance. Fourteen states had no publicly acknowledged effort. Eleven of the 17 public plans had updated within five years, with a majority addressing ventilator usage (16/17), influenza planning (14/17), and pediatric care (15/17), but substantially fewer addressing care for burn patients (9/17). Conclusion: Many states lacked publicly available guidance on maintaining standards of care during disasters, and many states with specific care guidelines had not sufficiently addressed the full spectrum of hazard to which their health care systems remain vulnerable.
引用
收藏
页码:599 / 603
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条