Resource-poor settings: Response, recovery, and research: Care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

Task Force for Mass Critical Care

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Planning for mass critical care in resource-poor and constrained settings has been largely ignored, despite large, densely crowded populations who are prone to suffer disproportionately from natural disasters. As a result, disaster response has been suboptimal and in many instances hampered by lack of planning, education and training, information, and communication. METHODS: The Resource-Poor Settings panel developed five key question domains; defining the term resource poor and using the traditional phases of the disaster cycle (mitigation/ preparedness/response/recovery). Literature searches were conducted to identify evidence to answer the key questions in these areas. Given a lack of data on which to develop evidence based recommendations, expert-opinion suggestions were developed, and consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: The five key questions were as follows: definition, capacity building and mitigation, what resources can we bring to bear to assist/surge, response, and reconstitution and recovery of host nation critical care capabilities. Addressing these led the panel to off er 33 suggestions. Because of the large number of suggestions, the results have been separated into two sections: part I, Infrastructure/Capacity in the accompanying article, and part II, Response/Recovery/ Research in this article. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of rudimentary ICU resources and capacity to enhance services plagues resource-poor or constrained settings. Capacity building therefore entails preventative strategies and strengthening of primary health services. Assistance from other countries and organizations is oft en needed to mount a surge response. Moreover, the disengagement of these responding groups and host country recovery require active planning. Future improvements in all phases require active research activities.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e168S-e177S
JournalChest
Volume146
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Disasters
Pandemics
Critical Illness
Capacity Building
Critical Care
Research
Plague
Expert Testimony
Health Services
Organizations
Education
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Resource-poor settings : Response, recovery, and research: Care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement. / Task Force for Mass Critical Care.

In: Chest, Vol. 146, 01.10.2014, p. e168S-e177S.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2ae90c63521649fb8a43449ce5498e06,
title = "Resource-poor settings: Response, recovery, and research: Care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Planning for mass critical care in resource-poor and constrained settings has been largely ignored, despite large, densely crowded populations who are prone to suffer disproportionately from natural disasters. As a result, disaster response has been suboptimal and in many instances hampered by lack of planning, education and training, information, and communication. METHODS: The Resource-Poor Settings panel developed five key question domains; defining the term resource poor and using the traditional phases of the disaster cycle (mitigation/ preparedness/response/recovery). Literature searches were conducted to identify evidence to answer the key questions in these areas. Given a lack of data on which to develop evidence based recommendations, expert-opinion suggestions were developed, and consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: The five key questions were as follows: definition, capacity building and mitigation, what resources can we bring to bear to assist/surge, response, and reconstitution and recovery of host nation critical care capabilities. Addressing these led the panel to off er 33 suggestions. Because of the large number of suggestions, the results have been separated into two sections: part I, Infrastructure/Capacity in the accompanying article, and part II, Response/Recovery/ Research in this article. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of rudimentary ICU resources and capacity to enhance services plagues resource-poor or constrained settings. Capacity building therefore entails preventative strategies and strengthening of primary health services. Assistance from other countries and organizations is oft en needed to mount a surge response. Moreover, the disengagement of these responding groups and host country recovery require active planning. Future improvements in all phases require active research activities.",
author = "{Task Force for Mass Critical Care} and James Geiling and Burkle, {Frederick M.} and West, {T. Eoin} and Uyeki, {Timothy M.} and Dennis Amundson and Guillermo Dominguez-Cherit and Gomersall, {Charles D.} and Lim, {Matthew L.} and Valerie Luyckx and Babak Sarani and Christian, {Michael D.} and Devereaux, {Asha V.} and Dichter, {Jeffrey R.} and Niranjan Kissoon",
year = "2014",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1378/chest.14-0745",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "146",
pages = "e168S--e177S",
journal = "Chest",
issn = "0012-3692",
publisher = "American College of Chest Physicians",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Resource-poor settings

T2 - Response, recovery, and research: Care of the critically ill and injured during pandemics and disasters: CHEST consensus statement

AU - Task Force for Mass Critical Care

AU - Geiling, James

AU - Burkle, Frederick M.

AU - West, T. Eoin

AU - Uyeki, Timothy M.

AU - Amundson, Dennis

AU - Dominguez-Cherit, Guillermo

AU - Gomersall, Charles D.

AU - Lim, Matthew L.

AU - Luyckx, Valerie

AU - Sarani, Babak

AU - Christian, Michael D.

AU - Devereaux, Asha V.

AU - Dichter, Jeffrey R.

AU - Kissoon, Niranjan

PY - 2014/10/1

Y1 - 2014/10/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: Planning for mass critical care in resource-poor and constrained settings has been largely ignored, despite large, densely crowded populations who are prone to suffer disproportionately from natural disasters. As a result, disaster response has been suboptimal and in many instances hampered by lack of planning, education and training, information, and communication. METHODS: The Resource-Poor Settings panel developed five key question domains; defining the term resource poor and using the traditional phases of the disaster cycle (mitigation/ preparedness/response/recovery). Literature searches were conducted to identify evidence to answer the key questions in these areas. Given a lack of data on which to develop evidence based recommendations, expert-opinion suggestions were developed, and consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: The five key questions were as follows: definition, capacity building and mitigation, what resources can we bring to bear to assist/surge, response, and reconstitution and recovery of host nation critical care capabilities. Addressing these led the panel to off er 33 suggestions. Because of the large number of suggestions, the results have been separated into two sections: part I, Infrastructure/Capacity in the accompanying article, and part II, Response/Recovery/ Research in this article. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of rudimentary ICU resources and capacity to enhance services plagues resource-poor or constrained settings. Capacity building therefore entails preventative strategies and strengthening of primary health services. Assistance from other countries and organizations is oft en needed to mount a surge response. Moreover, the disengagement of these responding groups and host country recovery require active planning. Future improvements in all phases require active research activities.

AB - BACKGROUND: Planning for mass critical care in resource-poor and constrained settings has been largely ignored, despite large, densely crowded populations who are prone to suffer disproportionately from natural disasters. As a result, disaster response has been suboptimal and in many instances hampered by lack of planning, education and training, information, and communication. METHODS: The Resource-Poor Settings panel developed five key question domains; defining the term resource poor and using the traditional phases of the disaster cycle (mitigation/ preparedness/response/recovery). Literature searches were conducted to identify evidence to answer the key questions in these areas. Given a lack of data on which to develop evidence based recommendations, expert-opinion suggestions were developed, and consensus was achieved using a modified Delphi process. RESULTS: The five key questions were as follows: definition, capacity building and mitigation, what resources can we bring to bear to assist/surge, response, and reconstitution and recovery of host nation critical care capabilities. Addressing these led the panel to off er 33 suggestions. Because of the large number of suggestions, the results have been separated into two sections: part I, Infrastructure/Capacity in the accompanying article, and part II, Response/Recovery/ Research in this article. CONCLUSIONS: A lack of rudimentary ICU resources and capacity to enhance services plagues resource-poor or constrained settings. Capacity building therefore entails preventative strategies and strengthening of primary health services. Assistance from other countries and organizations is oft en needed to mount a surge response. Moreover, the disengagement of these responding groups and host country recovery require active planning. Future improvements in all phases require active research activities.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84908491629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84908491629&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1378/chest.14-0745

DO - 10.1378/chest.14-0745

M3 - Article

C2 - 25144410

AN - SCOPUS:84908491629

VL - 146

SP - e168S-e177S

JO - Chest

JF - Chest

SN - 0012-3692

ER -