Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Emergency Medicine 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research article

Consensus on items and quantities of clinical equipment required to deal with a mass casualties big bang incident: a national Delphi study

Authors: Edward A S Duncan, Keith Colver, Nadine Dougall, Kevin Swingler, John Stephenson, Purva Abhyankar

Published in: BMC Emergency Medicine | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Major short-notice or sudden impact incidents, which result in a large number of casualties, are rare events. However health services must be prepared to respond to such events appropriately. In the United Kingdom (UK), a mass casualties incident is when the normal response of several National Health Service organizations to a major incident, has to be supported with extraordinary measures. Having the right type and quantity of clinical equipment is essential, but planning for such emergencies is challenging. To date, the equipment stored for such events has been selected on the basis of local clinical judgment and has evolved without an explicit evidence-base. This has resulted in considerable variations in the types and quantities of clinical equipment being stored in different locations. This study aimed to develop an expert consensus opinion of the essential items and minimum quantities of clinical equipment that is required to treat 100 people at the scene of a big bang mass casualties event.

Methods

A three round modified Delphi study was conducted with 32 experts using a specifically developed web-based platform. Individuals were invited to participate if they had personal clinical experience of providing a pre-hospital emergency medical response to a mass casualties incident, or had responsibility in health emergency planning for mass casualties incidents and were in a position of authority within the sphere of emergency health planning. Each item’s importance was measured on a 5-point Likert scale. The quantity of items required was measured numerically. Data were analyzed using nonparametric statistics.

Results

Experts achieved consensus on a total of 134 items (54%) on completion of the study. Experts did not reach consensus on 114 (46%) items. Median quantities and interquartile ranges of the items, and their recommended quantities were identified and are presented.

Conclusions

This study is the first to produce an expert consensus on the items and quantities of clinical equipment that are required to treat 100 people at the scene of a big bang mass casualties event. The findings can be used, both in the UK and internationally, to support decision makers in the planning of equipment for such incidents.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference NHS Scotland Resilience Team at Scottish Government: Mass Casualties Incidents A Framework for Planning NHS Scotland. 2009, Edinburgh: Scottish Government NHS Scotland Resilience Team at Scottish Government: Mass Casualties Incidents A Framework for Planning NHS Scotland. 2009, Edinburgh: Scottish Government
2.
go back to reference Government UK: Civil Contingencies Act. 2004, London: Stationary Office Government UK: Civil Contingencies Act. 2004, London: Stationary Office
3.
go back to reference UK Government: Coroner’s Inquests into the London Bombings of 7 July 2005. Report Under Rule 43 of The Coroner’s Rules 1984. 2012, London: Stationary Office UK Government: Coroner’s Inquests into the London Bombings of 7 July 2005. Report Under Rule 43 of The Coroner’s Rules 1984. 2012, London: Stationary Office
4.
go back to reference Timble J, Ringel J, Fox S, Pillemer F, Waxman D, Moore M, Hansen C, Knebel A, Ricciardi R, Kellermann A: Systematic review of strategies to manage and allocate scarce resources during mass casualty events. Ann Emerg Med. 2013, 61: 677-689. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.005.CrossRef Timble J, Ringel J, Fox S, Pillemer F, Waxman D, Moore M, Hansen C, Knebel A, Ricciardi R, Kellermann A: Systematic review of strategies to manage and allocate scarce resources during mass casualty events. Ann Emerg Med. 2013, 61: 677-689. 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2013.02.005.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Department of Health: Emergency preparedness division. Mass casualties incidents – A framework for planning. 2007, London: Stationary Office Department of Health: Emergency preparedness division. Mass casualties incidents – A framework for planning. 2007, London: Stationary Office
6.
go back to reference Linstone HA, Turoff M: The delphi method: techniques and applications. Technometrics. 2002, 18: 363- Linstone HA, Turoff M: The delphi method: techniques and applications. Technometrics. 2002, 18: 363-
7.
go back to reference Mead D, Mosely L: The use of delphi as a research approach. Nurse Researcher. 2001, 8: 4-37.CrossRef Mead D, Mosely L: The use of delphi as a research approach. Nurse Researcher. 2001, 8: 4-37.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Duncan EAS, Nicol MM, Ager A: Factors that constitute a good cognitive behavioural treatment manual: a delphi study. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2004, 32: 199-213. 10.1017/S135246580400116X.CrossRef Duncan EAS, Nicol MM, Ager A: Factors that constitute a good cognitive behavioural treatment manual: a delphi study. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2004, 32: 199-213. 10.1017/S135246580400116X.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Dwyer M: A delphi survey of research priorities and identified areas for collaborative research in health sector library and information services UK. Health Libr Rev. 1999, 16: 174-91. 10.1046/j.1365-2532.1999.00228.x.CrossRefPubMed Dwyer M: A delphi survey of research priorities and identified areas for collaborative research in health sector library and information services UK. Health Libr Rev. 1999, 16: 174-91. 10.1046/j.1365-2532.1999.00228.x.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Aron D, Pogach L: Quality indicators for diabetes mellitus in the ambulatory setting : using the delphi method to inform performance measurement development. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 2008, 17: 315-31. 10.1136/qshc.2007.026161.CrossRefPubMed Aron D, Pogach L: Quality indicators for diabetes mellitus in the ambulatory setting : using the delphi method to inform performance measurement development. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 2008, 17: 315-31. 10.1136/qshc.2007.026161.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ager A, Stark L, Akesson B, Boothby N: Defining best practice in care and protection of children in crisis-affected settings: a Delphi study. Child Dev. 2010, 81: 1271-86. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01467.x.CrossRefPubMed Ager A, Stark L, Akesson B, Boothby N: Defining best practice in care and protection of children in crisis-affected settings: a Delphi study. Child Dev. 2010, 81: 1271-86. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01467.x.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Woollard M: Emergency calls not requiring an urgent ambulance response: expert consensus. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2003, 7: 384-91. 10.1080/10903120390936626.CrossRefPubMed Woollard M: Emergency calls not requiring an urgent ambulance response: expert consensus. Prehosp Emerg Care. 2003, 7: 384-91. 10.1080/10903120390936626.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Crawford AWF, Mackway-Jones K, Russell D, Carley S: Planning for chemical incidents by implementing a Delphi based consensus study. Emerg Med J. 2004, 21: 24-29. 10.1136/emj.2003.003087.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Crawford AWF, Mackway-Jones K, Russell D, Carley S: Planning for chemical incidents by implementing a Delphi based consensus study. Emerg Med J. 2004, 21: 24-29. 10.1136/emj.2003.003087.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Carley S, Mackway-Jones K, Donnan S: Delphi study into planning for care of children in major incidents. Arch Dis Child. 1999, 80: 406-409. 10.1136/adc.80.5.406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Carley S, Mackway-Jones K, Donnan S: Delphi study into planning for care of children in major incidents. Arch Dis Child. 1999, 80: 406-409. 10.1136/adc.80.5.406.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Beattie E, Mackway-Jones K: A Delphi study to identify performance indicators for emergency medicine. Emerg Med J. 2004, 21: 47-50. 10.1136/emj.2003.001123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Beattie E, Mackway-Jones K: A Delphi study to identify performance indicators for emergency medicine. Emerg Med J. 2004, 21: 47-50. 10.1136/emj.2003.001123.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Jensen J, Croskerry P, Travers A: Paramedic clincial decision making during high acuity emergency calls: design and methodology of a delphi study. BMC Emerg Med. 2009, 9: 17-10.1186/1471-227X-9-17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Jensen J, Croskerry P, Travers A: Paramedic clincial decision making during high acuity emergency calls: design and methodology of a delphi study. BMC Emerg Med. 2009, 9: 17-10.1186/1471-227X-9-17.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Jensen J, Croskerry P, Travers A: Consensus on paramedic clinical decisions during high-acuity emergency calls: results of a canadian delphi study. Can J Emerg Med. 2011, 13: 310-318. Jensen J, Croskerry P, Travers A: Consensus on paramedic clinical decisions during high-acuity emergency calls: results of a canadian delphi study. Can J Emerg Med. 2011, 13: 310-318.
18.
go back to reference Powell C: The delphi technique: myths and realities. J Adv Nurs. 2003, 41: 376-82. 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x.CrossRefPubMed Powell C: The delphi technique: myths and realities. J Adv Nurs. 2003, 41: 376-82. 10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook R: Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for Use. 1991, Santa Monica: RAND Corporation Fink A, Kosecoff J, Chassin M, Brook R: Consensus methods: characteristics and guidelines for Use. 1991, Santa Monica: RAND Corporation
20.
go back to reference National Patient Safety Agency: Defining Research: NRES Guidance to help you decide if your project requires review by a Research Ethics Committee. 2010 National Patient Safety Agency: Defining Research: NRES Guidance to help you decide if your project requires review by a Research Ethics Committee. 2010
21.
go back to reference Williams P, Webb C: The delphi technique: a methodological discussion. J Adv Nurs. 1994, 19: 180-186. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01066.x.CrossRefPubMed Williams P, Webb C: The delphi technique: a methodological discussion. J Adv Nurs. 1994, 19: 180-186. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1994.tb01066.x.CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Okoli C, Pawlowski SD: The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manage. 2004, 42: 15-29. 10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002.CrossRef Okoli C, Pawlowski SD: The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manage. 2004, 42: 15-29. 10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Murphy M, Black N, Lamping D, McKee C, Sanderson C, Askham J, Marteau T: Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technol Assess. 1998, 2: 3- Murphy M, Black N, Lamping D, McKee C, Sanderson C, Askham J, Marteau T: Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technol Assess. 1998, 2: 3-
Metadata
Title
Consensus on items and quantities of clinical equipment required to deal with a mass casualties big bang incident: a national Delphi study
Authors
Edward A S Duncan
Keith Colver
Nadine Dougall
Kevin Swingler
John Stephenson
Purva Abhyankar
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Emergency Medicine / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1471-227X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-227X-14-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

BMC Emergency Medicine 1/2014 Go to the issue