Citation

Coleman CN, Weinstock DM, Casagrande R, Hick JL, Bader JL, Chang F, Nemhauser JB, Knebel AR. Disaster Med. Public Health Prep. 2011; 5(Suppl 1): S111-21.

Affiliation

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, US Department of Health and Human Services, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. ccoleman@mail.nih.gov

Copyright

(Copyright © 2011, Society for Disaster Medicine and Public Health, Publisher Cambridge University Press)

DOI

10.1001/dmp.2011.22

PMID

21402803

Abstract

Based on background information in this special issue of the journal, possible triage recommendations for the first 4 days following a nuclear detonation, when response resources will be limited, are provided. The series includes: modeling for physical infrastructure damage; severity and number of injuries; expected outcome of triage to immediate, delayed, or expectant management; resources required for treating injuries of varying severity; and how resource scarcity (particularly medical personnel) worsens outcome. Four key underlying considerations are: 1.) resource adequacy will vary greatly across the response areas by time and location; 2.) to achieve fairness in resource allocation, a common triage approach is important; 3.) at some times and locations, it will be necessary to change from "conventional" to "contingency" or "crisis" standards of medical care (with a resulting change in triage approach from treating the "sickest first" to treating those "most likely to survive" first); and 4.) clinical reassessment and repeat triage are critical, as resource scarcity worsens or improves. Changing triage order and conserving and allocating resources for both lifesaving and palliative care can maintain fairness, support symptomatic care, and save more lives. Included in this article are printable triage cards that reflect our recommendations. These are not formal guidelines. With new research, data, and discussion, these recommendations will undoubtedly evolve.

Language: en