RESUMEN
The goal of this research was to identify, summarize, and evaluate pediatric disaster preparedness resources in the United States and to identify areas that need improvement or further development. Using standard literature, gray literature and website reviews, relevant resources were identified and the 50 most relevant resources were studied in depth. Each resource was given a grade of A, B, or C based on content, format, quality, and thoroughness. These resources were divided into 3 categories: (1) hospital resources, (2) school resources, and (3) training/education resources. Half of the 50 resources (25) were given a grade of A, indicating the highest level of quality and thoroughness, with pertinent information presented in a clear format. Sixteen of the resources were given a rating of B, while 9 of the resources were given a rating of C. Over 60% of the resources did not contain culturally sensitive information and more than 60% of the resources did not contain preparedness information for children with disabilities. Resources specific to hospitals and schools were limited in number and quality available, while training/education resources were widely available. In addition, 60% of resources were not specific to schools, children's hospitals, or to certain occupations (ie, nurses, doctors, teachers, principals). Based on these results, gaps in cultural sensitivity were identified and limitations in resources for children with disabilities and for schools and hospitals currently exist. All these areas require further development in the field of pediatric disaster preparedness (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2019;13:330-337).
Asunto(s)
Planificación en Desastres/normas , Pediatría/métodos , Planificación en Desastres/métodos , Recursos en Salud/provisión & distribución , Recursos en Salud/tendencias , Humanos , Pediatría/tendencias , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
Community resilience (CR)--ability to withstand and recover from a disaster--is a national policy expectation that challenges health departments to merge disaster preparedness and community health promotion and to build stronger partnerships with organizations outside government, yet guidance is limited. A baseline survey documented community resilience-building barriers and facilitators for health department and community-based organization (CBO) staff. Questions focused on CBO engagement, government-CBO partnerships, and community education. Most health department staff and CBO members devoted minimal time to community disaster preparedness though many serve populations that would benefit. Respondents observed limited CR activities to activate in a disaster. The findings highlighted opportunities for engaging communities in disaster preparedness and informed the development of a community action plan and toolkit.
Asunto(s)
Planificación en Desastres/métodos , Características de la Residencia , Resiliencia Psicológica , Participación de la Comunidad , Recolección de Datos , Planificación en Desastres/organización & administración , Planificación en Desastres/estadística & datos numéricos , Educación en Salud , Humanos , Los Angeles , Desarrollo de Programa , Asociación entre el Sector Público-PrivadoRESUMEN
Community resilience (CR) is a priority for preparedness, but few models exist. A steering council used community-partnered participatory research to support workgroups in developing CR action plans and hosted forums for input to design a pilot demonstration of implementing CR versus enhanced individual preparedness toolkits. Qualitative data describe how stakeholders viewed CR, how toolkits were developed, and demonstration design evolution. Stakeholders viewed community engagement as facilitating partnerships to implement CR programs when appropriately supported by policy and CR resources. Community engagement exercises clarified motivations and informed action plans (e.g., including vulnerable populations). Community input identified barriers (e.g., trust in government) and CR-building strategies. A CR toolkit and demonstration comparing its implementation with individual preparedness were codeveloped. Community-partnered participatory research was a useful framework to plan a CR initiative through knowledge exchange.