2 results
International Emergency Medical Teams Training Workshop Special Report
- Anthony Albina, Laura Archer, Marlène Boivin, Hilarie Cranmer, Kirsten Johnson, Gautham Krishnaraj, Anali Maneshi, Lisa Oddy, Lynda Redwood-Campbell, Rebecca Russell
-
- Journal:
- Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 33 / Issue 3 / June 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 April 2018, pp. 335-338
- Print publication:
- June 2018
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The World Health Organization’s (WHO; Geneva, Switzerland) Emergency Medical Team (EMT) Initiative created guidelines which define the basic procedures to be followed by personnel and teams, as well as the critical points to discuss before deploying a field hospital. However, to date, there is no formal standardized training program established for EMTs before deployment. Recognizing that the World Association of Disaster and Emergency Medicine (WADEM; Madison, Wisconsin USA) Congress brings together a diverse group of key stakeholders, a pre-Congress workshop was organized to seek out collective expertise and to identify key EMT training competencies for the future development of training programs and protocols. The future of EMT training should include standardization of curriculum and the recognition or accreditation of selected training programs. The outputs of this pre-WADEM Congress workshop provide an initial contribution to the EMT Training Working Group, as this group works on mapping training, competencies, and curriculum. Common EMT training themes that were identified as fundamental during the pre-Congress workshop include: the ability to adapt one’s professional skills to low-resource settings; context-specific training, including the ability to serve the needs of the affected population in natural disasters; training together as a multi-disciplinary EMT prior to deployment; and the value of simulation in training.
,Albina A ,Archer L ,Boivin M ,Cranmer H ,Johnson K ,Krishnaraj G ,Maneshi A ,Oddy L ,Redwood-Campbell L .Russell R International Emergency Medical Teams Training Workshop Special Report . Prehosp Disaster Med.2018 ;33 (3 ):335 –338 .
Exploring International Views on Key Concepts for Mass-gathering Health through a Delphi Process
- Malinda Steenkamp, Alison E. Hutton, Jamie C. Ranse, Adam Lund, Sheila A. Turris, Ron Bowles, Katherine Arbuthnott, Paul A. Arbon
-
- Journal:
- Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 31 / Issue 4 / August 2016
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 23 May 2016, pp. 443-453
- Print publication:
- August 2016
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Introduction
The science underpinning mass-gathering health (MGH) is developing rapidly. However, MGH terminology and concepts are not yet well defined or used consistently. These variations can complicate comparisons across settings. There is, therefore, a need to develop consensus and standardize concepts and data points to support the development of a robust MGH evidence-base for governments, event planners, responders, and researchers. This project explored the views and sought consensus of international MGH experts on previously published concepts around MGH to inform the development of a transnational minimum data set (MDS) with an accompanying data dictionary (DD).
ReportA two-round Delphi process was undertaken involving volunteers from the World Health Organization (WHO) Virtual Interdisciplinary Advisory Group (VIAG) on Mass Gatherings (MGs) and the MG section of the World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine (WADEM). The first online survey tested agreement on six key concepts: (1) using the term “MG HEALTH;” (2) purposes of the proposed MDS and DD; (3) event phases; (4) two MG population models; (5) a MGH conceptual diagram; and (6) a data matrix for organizing MGH data elements. Consensus was defined as ≥80% agreement. Round 2 presented five refined MGH principles based on Round 1 input that was analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis. Thirty-eight participants started Round 1 with 36 completing the survey and 24 (65% of 36) completing Round 2. Agreement was reached on: the term “MGH” (n=35/38; 92%); the stated purposes for the MDS (n=38/38; 100%); the two MG population models (n=31/36; 86% and n=30/36; 83%, respectively); and the event phases (n=34/36; 94%). Consensus was not achieved on the overall conceptual MGH diagram (n=25/37; 67%) and the proposed matrix to organize data elements (n=28/37; 77%). In Round 2, agreement was reached on all the proposed principles and revisions, except on the MGH diagram (n=18/24; 75%).
Discussion/ConclusionsEvent health stakeholders require sound data upon which to build a robust MGH evidence-base. The move towards standardization of data points and/or reporting items of interest will strengthen the development of such an evidence-base from which governments, researchers, clinicians, and event planners could benefit. There is substantial agreement on some broad concepts underlying MGH amongst an international group of MG experts. Refinement is needed regarding an overall conceptual diagram and proposed matrix for organizing data elements.
,Steenkamp M ,Hutton AE ,Ranse JC ,Lund A ,Turris SA ,Bowles R ,Arbuthnott K .Arbon PA Exploring International Views on Key Concepts for Mass-gathering Health through a Delphi Process . Prehosp Disaster Med.2016 ;31 (4 ):443 –453 .