ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Airport emergencies are rare but potentially catastrophic; therefore, system preparedness is crucial. Airport emergency plans include the organization of emergency drills on a regular basis, including full-scale exercises, to train and test the entire rescue organization. OBJECTIVE: This report describes a full-scale simulation at Bologna International Airport, Italy, in October 2022, involving local EMS resources. METHODS: A full-scale aeroplane crash was simulated on the airport ground, activating the Airport emergency plan, and requiring the intervention of supplementary resources (ambulances, medical cars, and other emergency vehicles). RESULTS: Twenty-seven simulated patients were evaluated by EMS: START triage assessment was correct for 81.48% of patients; 11.11% were over-triaged and 7.41% were under-triaged. All patients were transported to the hospitals of the area. The simulation ended 2 hours and 28 minutes after the initial alarm. CONCLUSION: The response time proved a good response. Triage accuracy was correct in more than 80% of simulated patients. The availability of a trauma centre within 6 kilometres allowed the transportation of a quota of patients directly from the event, without affecting transportation times. Areas for improvement were identified in the communication within the different agencies and in moving ambulances within the airport runway without airport personnel guidance.
Subject(s)
Disaster Planning , Emergency Medical Services , Mass Casualty Incidents , Humans , Emergencies , Airports , Triage , Italy , AircraftABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: START (Simple Triage and Rapid Treatment) triage is a tool that is available even to nonmedical rescue personnel in case of a disaster or mass casualty incident (MCI). In Italy, no data are available on whether application of the START protocol could improve patient outcomes during a disaster or MCI. We aimed to address whether "last-minute" START training of nonmedical personnel during a disaster or MCI would result in more effective triage of patients. METHODS: In this case-control study, 400 nonmedical ambulance crew members were randomly assigned to a non-START or a START group (200 per group). The START group received last-minute START training. Each group examined 6000 patients, obtained from the Emergo Train System (ETS Italy, Bologna, Italy) victims database, and assigned patients a triage code (black-red-yellow-green) along with a reason for the assignment. Each rescuer triaged 30 patients within a 30-minute time frame. Results were analyzed according to Fisher's exact test for a P value<0.01. Under- and over-triage ratios were analyzed as well. RESULTS: The START group completed the evaluations in 15 minutes, whereas the non-START group took 30 minutes. The START group correctly triaged 94.2% of their patients, as opposed to 59.83% of the non-START group (P<0.01). Under- and over-triage were, respectively, 2.73% and 3.08% for the START group versus 13.67% and 26.5% for the non-START group. The non-START group had 458 "preventable deaths" on 6000 cases because of incorrect triage, whereas the START group had 91. CONCLUSIONS: Even a "last-minute" training on the START triage protocol allows nonmedical personnel to better identify and triage the victims of a disaster or MCI, resulting in more effective and efficient medical intervention. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2017;11:305-309).
