Seasons of smoke and fire: preparing health systems for improved performance before, during, and after wildfires.

Increased frequency, intensity, and duration of wildfires are intensifying exposure to direct and smoke-related hazards in many areas, leading to evacuation and smoke-related effects on health and health systems that can affect regions extending over thousands of kilometres. Effective preparation and response are currently hampered by inadequate training, continued siloing of disciplines, insufficient finance, and inadequate coordination between health systems and governance at municipal, regional, national, and international levels. This Review highlights the key health and health systems considerations before, during, and after wildfires, and outlines how a health system should respond to optimise population health outcomes now and into the future. The focus is on the implications of wildfires for air quality, mental health, and emergency management, with elements of international policy and finance also addressed. We discuss commonalities of existing climate-resilient health care and disaster management frameworks and integrate them into an approach that addresses issues of financing, leadership and governance, health workforce, health information systems, infrastructure, supply chain, technologies, community interaction and health-care delivery, before, during, and after a wildfire season. This Review is a practical briefing for leaders and health professionals facing severe wildfire seasons and a call to break down silos and join with other disciplines to proactively plan for and fund innovation and coordination in service of a healthier future.

The benefits of lessons learned: The COVID-19 experience in the Canadian province of Alberta.

The mantra from emergency management professionals is that lessons learned when enacted are beneficial; when they are not, it is a lesson observed. The COVID-19 pandemic has required healthcare organisations to be agile and responsive. This paper describes how Alberta Health Services leveraged the lessons learned from previous incidents in order to provide a flexible response to a rapidly evolving situation.

Canadian health emergency management professionals' perspectives on the prevalence and effectiveness of disaster preparedness activities in response to COVID-19.

Emergency management (EM) professionals play an integral role in preparing healthcare organizations for disasters but evidence of their pervasiveness in Canadian healthcare is limited. Through an exploratory Canada-wide survey of EM in healthcare organizations, we aim to develop understanding of the prevalence and effectiveness of the disaster preparedness activities enacted in preparation for COVID-19. The online survey generated 161 responses; 150 (93%) had EM responsibility. EM reported that reviewing infectious disease (pandemic) plans and protocols was the most widespread activity (82%), while simulation-based exercises was the least (26%). Organizational incident management response to COVID-19 was led by a sole 'incident commander' 61% of the time, while 39% of 'incident commands' were led by multiple individuals. Of all those assigned to lead IM, only 68% received training in that role. Overall, the prevalence of disaster preparedness activities in healthcare organizations was positively associated with leaders who received training in incident response and having a dedicated EM resource. Meanwhile, the overall effectiveness of activities was positively correlated with having a sole 'incident commander' and was found to improve as the overall prevalence of activities rose. The study provides strong evidence for regional, organizational, and EM resource variation in the delivery of disaster preparedness activities and training for leaders in Canadian healthcare. Hence, we recommend the creation of a national health emergency preparedness system which includes legislated standards and a national training centre to ensure Canadian healthcare is bolstered against future disasters including pandemics.

Ten (+1) lessons from conducting a mass casualty in situ simulation exercise in a Canadian academic hospital setting.

Providing care in a twenty-first century urban emergency department (ED) and trauma center is a complex high-pressure practice environment. The pressure is intensified during patient surge scenarios commonly seen during mass casualty incidents, such that response must be practiced regularly. Beyond clinical mastery of individual patient trauma care, a coordinated system-level response is essential to optimize patient care during these relatively infrequent events. This paper highlights the need to perform exercises in hospitals while providing practical advice on how to utilize in situ simulation for mass casualty testing. Eleven lessons are presented to assist other emergency management professionals, hospital administrators, or clinical staff to achieve success with in situ simulation. Based upon our experience designing and executing an in situ mass casualty simulation within an ED, we offer lessons applicable to any type of disaster exercise. Simulation offers a powerful tool for the conduct of disaster preparedness exercises for staff across multiple hospital departments and professions.

Integration of In Situ Simulation Into an Emergency Department Code Orange Exercise in a Tertiary Care Trauma Referral Center.

OBJECTIVES: Disaster-preparedness and response are a commonly overlooked aspect of hospital policy and can frequently be outdated and undertested. Simulation-based education has become a core education modality within Canadian medical training programs. We hypothesized that integrating in situ simulation (ISS) into a hospital-wide, mass-casualty response exercise would enhance realism and our ability to identify latent safety threats (LSTs). METHODS: Using ISS we created a simulated mass shooting scenario with 20 patients, played by actors in full moulage, presenting to a large tertiary care hospital over a 50-minute period. RESULTS: Integrating ISS into our exercise created a realistic experience for the participants involved and improved participant education, while imparting enough systemic stress to expose LSTs associated within patient care and hospital policy. CONCLUSION: Overall, ISS was successfully used and enhanced a large-scale test of our hospital's mass-casualty response plan.