Observed Versus Expected COVID-19 Infections Among National Football League Players During the 2020 Season.

BACKGROUND: The National Football League (NFL) and National Football League Players Association implemented a set of strict protocols for the 2020 season with the intent to mitigate COVID-19 risk among players and staff. In that timeframe, the league's 32 teams completed 256 regular season games and several thousand meetings and practices. In parallel, community cases of COVID-19 were highly prevalent. We assess the risk of holding a 2020 NFL season by comparing community and player COVID-19 infections. METHODS: We used county-level COVID-19 test data from each team to establish baseline distributions of infection rates expected to occur in a population similar in age and sex to NFL players. We used a binomial distribution to simulate expected infections in each community cohort and compared these findings with observed COVID-19 infections in players. RESULTS: Over a 5-month period (1 August 2020 to 2 January 2021), positive NFL player infections (n = 256) were 55.7% lower than expected when compared with simulations from NFL community cohorts. For 30 of 32 teams (94%), observed counts fell at or below expectation, including 28 teams (88%) for which rates were lower. Two teams fell above baseline expectation. CONCLUSIONS: The NFL/NFLPA protocols that governed team facilities, travel, gameday, and activities outside of the workplace were associated with lower infection rates among NFL players compared with the surrounding community. The NFL's 2020-2021 season are consistent with the hypothesis that robust testing and behavioral protocols support a safe return to sport and work.

Fair prioritization of casualties in disaster triage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Disasters may result in mass casualties and an imbalance between health care demands and supplies. This imbalance necessitates the prioritization of the victims based on the severity of their condition. Contributing factors and their effect on decision-making is a challenging issue in disaster triage. The present study seeks to address criteria for ethical decision-making in the prioritization of patients in disaster triage. METHODS: This conventional content analysis study was conducted in 2017. Subjects were selected from among Iranian experts using purposeful and snowball sampling methods. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews and were analyzed by the content analysis. RESULTS: Efficient and effective triage and priority-oriented triage were the main categories. These categories summarized a number of medical and nonmedical factors that should be considered in the prioritization of the victims in disaster triage. CONCLUSION: A combination of measures should be considered to maximize the benefits of the prioritization of causalities in disasters. None of these measures alone would suffice to explain all aspects of ethical decision-making in disaster triage. Further investigations are needed to elaborate on these criteria in decision-making.

Perceptions on principle of priority setting in disaster triage: A Q-method study.

INTRODUCTION: An ethical plan is required to make decisions regarding setting the priority for assisting injured patients through triage. The aim of this study was to explore the measures used to sort patients for ethical decision-making in disaster triage. METHOD: The participants were 54 clinicians and non-clinicians among the Iranian experts. Q-statements were selected from a literature review and face-to-face interviews. Data were analyzed by principal components factor analysis (PCA), Varimax, and hand-rotation techniques. RESULTS: Distinct perspectives included: Saving patients with greater medical needs, survivability of patients and the community, providing effective treatment based on available capacity, maximizing health gain, supporting the human generation and productive and independent lives. Approximately 61% of the variance in decision is explained by these factors. CONCLUSION: A combination of saving more people and more positive outcomes has been accepted to make an ethical decision in triage. Public engagement needs to reach a more acceptable view of patients' prioritizing factors in a scarce-resource situation.

Defining a Research Agenda for Layperson Prehospital Hemorrhage Control: A Consensus Statement.

Importance: Trauma is the leading cause of death for US individuals younger than 45 years, and uncontrolled hemorrhage is a major cause of trauma mortality. The US military's medical advancements in the field of prehospital hemorrhage control have reduced battlefield mortality by 44%. However, despite support from many national health care organizations, no integrated approach to research has been made regarding implementation, epidemiology, education, and logistics of prehospital hemorrhage control by layperson immediate responders in the civilian sector. Objective: To create a national research agenda to help guide future work for prehospital hemorrhage control by laypersons. Evidence Review: The 2-day, in-person, National Stop the Bleed (STB) Research Consensus Conference was conducted on February 27 to 28, 2019, to identify and achieve consensus on research gaps. Participants included (1) subject matter experts, (2) professional society-designated leaders, (3) representatives from the federal government, and (4) representatives from private foundations. Before the conference, participants were provided a scoping review on layperson prehospital hemorrhage control. A 3-round modified Delphi consensus process was conducted to determine high-priority research questions. The top items, with median rating of 8 or more on a Likert scale of 1 to 9 points, were identified and became part of the national STB research agenda. Findings: Forty-five participants attended the conference. In round 1, participants submitted 487 research questions. After deduplication and sorting, 162 questions remained across 5 a priori-defined themes. Two subsequent rounds of rating generated consensus on 113 high-priority, 27 uncertain-priority, and 22 low-priority questions. The final prioritized research agenda included the top 24 questions, including 8 for epidemiology and effectiveness, 4 for materials, 9 for education, 2 for global health, and 1 for health policy. Conclusions and Relevance: The National STB Research Consensus Conference identified and prioritized a national research agenda to support laypersons in reducing preventable deaths due to life-threatening hemorrhage. Investigators and funding agencies can use this agenda to guide their future work and funding priorities.

Triage of Scarce Critical Care Resources in COVID-19 An Implementation Guide for Regional Allocation: An Expert Panel Report of the Task Force for Mass Critical Care and the American College of Chest Physicians.

Public health emergencies have the potential to place enormous strain on health systems. The current pandemic of the novel 2019 coronavirus disease has required hospitals in numerous countries to expand their surge capacity to meet the needs of patients with critical illness. When even surge capacity is exceeded, however, principles of critical care triage may be needed as a means to allocate scarce resources, such as mechanical ventilators or key medications. The goal of a triage system is to direct limited resources towards patients most likely to benefit from them. Implementing a triage system requires careful coordination between clinicians, health systems, local and regional governments, and the public, with a goal of transparency to maintain trust. We discuss the principles of tertiary triage and methods for implementing such a system, emphasizing that these systems should serve only as a last resort. Even under triage, we must uphold our obligation to care for all patients as best possible under difficult circumstances.

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE) Science and the CBRNE Science Medical Operations Science Support Expert (CMOSSE).

A national need is to prepare for and respond to accidental or intentional disasters categorized as chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE). These incidents require specific subject-matter expertise, yet have commonalities. We identify 7 core elements comprising CBRNE science that require integration for effective preparedness planning and public health and medical response and recovery. These core elements are (1) basic and clinical sciences, (2) modeling and systems management, (3) planning, (4) response and incident management, (5) recovery and resilience, (6) lessons learned, and (7) continuous improvement. A key feature is the ability of relevant subject matter experts to integrate information into response operations. We propose the CBRNE medical operations science support expert as a professional who (1) understands that CBRNE incidents require an integrated systems approach, (2) understands the key functions and contributions of CBRNE science practitioners, (3) helps direct strategic and tactical CBRNE planning and responses through first-hand experience, and (4) provides advice to senior decision-makers managing response activities. Recognition of both CBRNE science as a distinct competency and the establishment of the CBRNE medical operations science support expert informs the public of the enormous progress made, broadcasts opportunities for new talent, and enhances the sophistication and analytic expertise of senior managers planning for and responding to CBRNE incidents.

Development and Performance of a Checklist for Initial Triage After an Anthrax Mass Exposure Event.

Background: Population exposure to Bacillus anthracis spores could cause mass casualties requiring complex medical care. Rapid identification of patients needing anthrax-specific therapies will improve patient outcomes and resource use. Objective: To develop a checklist that rapidly distinguishes most anthrax from nonanthrax illnesses on the basis of clinical presentation and identifies patients requiring diagnostic testing after a population exposure. Design: Comparison of published anthrax case reports from 1880 through 2013 that included patients seeking anthrax-related care at 2 epicenters of the 2001 U.S. anthrax attacks. Setting: Outpatient and inpatient. Patients: 408 case patients with inhalation, ingestion, and cutaneous anthrax and primary anthrax meningitis, and 657 control patients. Measurements: Diagnostic test characteristics, including positive and negative likelihood ratios (LRs) and patient triage assignation. Results: Checklist-directed triage without diagnostic testing correctly classified 95% (95% CI, 93% to 97%) of 353 adult anthrax case patients and 76% (CI, 73% to 79%) of 647 control patients (positive LR, 3.96 [CI, 3.45 to 4.55]; negative LR, 0.07 [CI, 0.04 to 0.11]; false-negative rate, 5%; false-positive rate, 24%). Diagnostic testing was needed for triage in up to 5% of case patients and 15% of control patients and improved overall test characteristics (positive LR, 8.90 [CI, 7.05 to 11.24]; negative LR, 0.06 [CI, 0.04 to 0.09]; false-negative rate, 5%; false-positive rate, 11%). Checklist sensitivity and specificity were minimally affected by inclusion of pediatric patients. Sensitivity increased to 97% (CI, 94% to 100%) and 98% (CI, 96% to 100%), respectively, when only inhalation anthrax cases or higher-quality case reports were investigated. Limitations: Data on case patients were limited to nonstandardized, published observational reports, many of which lacked complete data on symptoms and signs of interest. Reporting bias favoring more severe cases and lack of intercurrent outbreaks (such as influenza) in the control populations may have improved test characteristics. Conclusion: A brief checklist covering symptoms and signs can distinguish anthrax from other conditions with minimal need for diagnostic testing after known or suspected population exposure. Primary Funding Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Ethical prioritization of patients during disaster triage: A systematic review of current evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Triage is a dynamic and complex decision-making process in order to determine priority of access to medical care in a disaster situation. The elements which should govern an ethical decision-making in prioritizing of victims have been debated for a long time. This paper aims to identify ethical principles guiding patient prioritization during disaster triage. METHOD: Electronic databases were searched via structured search strategy from 1990 until July 2017. The studies investigating patients' prioritization in disaster situation were eligible for inclusion. All types of articles and guidelines were included. RESULT: Of 7167 titles identified in the search, 35 studies were included. The important factors identified in patient prioritization were grouped into two categories: medical measures (medical need, likelihood of benefit and survivability) and Nonmedical measures (saving the most lives, youngest first, preserving function of society, protecting vulnerable groups, required resources and unbiased selection). Demographic characteristics, health status of patients, social value of patient, and unbiased selection are discriminatory factors in disaster triage. CONCLUSION: Various factors have been introduced to consider ethical patient prioritization in disaster triage. Providers' engagement, public education, and ongoing training are required to reach a fair decision.

Implications of Prenatal Exposure to the Spring 2011 Alabama and Missouri Tornadoes on Birth Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Despite emerging evidence of the detrimental effects of natural disasters on maternal and child health, little is known about exposure to tornadoes during the prenatal period and its impact on birth outcomes. We examined the relationship between prenatal exposure to the spring 2011 tornado outbreak in Alabama and Joplin (Missouri) and adverse birth outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional cohort study using the 2010-2012 linked infant births and deaths data set from the National Center for Health Statistics for tornado-affected counties in Alabama (n=126,453) and Missouri (Joplin, n=6,897). Chi-square and logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate associations between prenatal exposure to tornadoes and birth outcomes. RESULTS: Prenatal exposure to the tornado incidents did not influence birth weight outcomes. Women exposed to Alabama tornadoes were less likely to have a preterm birth compared to unexposed mothers (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.91, 0.96). Preterm births among Joplin-tornado exposed mothers were slightly higher (13%) compared with unexposed mothers (11.2%). Exposed mothers from Joplin were also more likely to have a cesarean section compared to their counterparts (OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.26). CONCLUSIONS: We found no association between tornado exposure and adverse birth weight and infant mortality rates. Our findings suggest that prenatal exposure can amplify the odds for a cesarean section. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:279-286).

Guidance, Training and Exercises for Responding to an Improvised Nuclear Device: First Receivers, Public Health.

All large-scale emergencies and disaster incidents, including the detonation of an improvised nuclear device (IND), have life and death medical consequences. Responders must have realistic plans to save lives and reduce physical and psychological morbidity. Fifteen years after 9/11, considerable progress toward developing and implementing such plans has been made, but gaps in the management of response to an IND loom large. Another paper in this series reviewed gaps for first responders; this paper reviews gaps for first receivers and public health. Closing gaps requires the implementation of complex systems including.

Proposed "Exposure And Symptom Triage" (EAST) Tool to Assess Radiation Exposure After a Nuclear Detonation.

ABSTRACTOne of the biggest medical challenges after the detonation of a nuclear device will be implementing a strategy to assess the severity of radiation exposure among survivors and to triage them appropriately. Those found to be at significant risk for radiation injury can be prioritized to receive potentially lifesaving myeloid cytokines and to be evacuated to other communities with intact health care infrastructure prior to the onset of severe complications of bone marrow suppression. Currently, the most efficient and accessible triage method is the use of sequential complete blood counts to assess lymphocyte depletion kinetics that correlate with estimated whole-body dose radiation exposure. However, even this simple test will likely not be available initially on the scale required to assess the at-risk population. Additional variables such as geographic location of exposure, sheltering, and signs and symptoms may be useful for initial sorting. An interdisciplinary working group composed of federal, state, and local public health experts proposes an Exposure And Symptom Triage (EAST) tool combining estimates of exposure from maps with clinical assessments and single lymphocyte counts if available. The proposed tool may help sort survivors efficiently at assembly centers near the damage and fallout zones and enable rapid prioritization for appropriate treatment and transport. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018; 12: 386-395).