Opportunities to Strengthen the National Disaster Medical System: The Military-Civilian NDMS Interoperability Study.

The definitive care component of the National Disaster Medical System (NDMS) may not be able to effectively manage tens of thousands of casualties resulting from a catastrophic disaster incident or overseas conflict. To address this potential national security threat, Congress authorized the US Secretary of Defense to conduct the NDMS Pilot Program to improve the interoperability, special capabilities, and patient capacity of the NDMS. The pilot's first phase was the Military-Civilian NDMS Interoperability Study, designed to identify broad themes to direct further NDMS research. Researchers conducted a series of facilitated discussions with 49 key NDMS federal and civilian (private sector) stakeholders to identify and assess weaknesses and opportunities for improving the NDMS. After qualitative analysis, 6 critical themes emerged: (1) coordination, collaboration, and communication between federal and private sector NDMS partners; (2) funding and incentives for improved surge capacity and preparedness for NDMS partners; (3) staffing capacity and competencies for government and private NDMS partners; (4) surge capacity, especially at private sector healthcare facilities; (5) training, education, and exercises and knowledge sharing between federal and private sector NDMS partners; and (6) metrics, benchmarks, and modeling for NDMS partners to track their NDMS-related capabilities and performance. These findings provide a roadmap for federal-level changes and additional operations research to strengthen the NDMS definitive care system, particularly in the areas of policy and legislation, operational coordination, and funding.

An Analysis of After Action Reports From Texas Hurricanes in 2005 and 2017.

OBJECTIVE: To review and analyze After Action Reports from jurisdictions in Texas following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 and Hurricane Harvey in 2017 in order to assess the utility of AARs as a quality improvement measurement tool. METHODS: The authors searched the Homeland Security Digital Library, the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Technical Resources, Assistance Center, and Information Exchange, and Google Scholar for any AARs that covered the response phase of at least one of the 3 hurricanes, mentioned the state of Texas, and suggested solutions to problems. The authors applied public health emergency management (PHEM) domains, as outlined by Rose et al, to frame the AAR analysis. AARs were coded by 2 reviewers independently, with a third acting as adjudicator. As an example, the problem statements in 2005 and 2017 AARs from 1 statewide agency were compared. RESULTS: Sixteen AARs met the inclusion criteria. There were 500 identified problem-solution sets mapped to a PHEM domain. The content was unevenly distributed, with most issues coming under PHEM 2: Policies, Plans, Procedures, and Partnerships at 45.2% in the 2005 hurricanes and 39.9% in 2017. AARs lacked consistent format and were often prepared by the response agencies themselves. Five consistent issues were raised in 2005 and again in 2017. These were volunteer management and credential verification, donations management, information sharing, appropriately identifying those requiring a medical needs shelter, and inadequate transportation to support evacuation. CONCLUSION: Because of the lack of objective data, inconsistent format, unevenly distributed content, and lack of adherence to any framework, AARs are fraught with shortcomings as a tool for PHEM. Inclusion of more objective reporting measures is urgently needed.