Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response: There’s an App for That 2.0

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Kyle J. McAtee ◽  
Robert Bedenbaugh ◽  
Dorothy (Christie) Lakis ◽  
Daniel J. Bachmann ◽  
Nicholas E. Kman
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Disaster Response ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
First Responders ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Disaster Medicine ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
Google Play

Abstract Introduction: In disaster response, smartphone applications (or apps) are being used by the layperson, emergency first responders, and health care providers to aid in everything from incident reporting to clinical decision making. However, quality apps are often diluted by the overwhelming number of apps that exist for both the lay public and first responders in the Apple iTunes (Apple Inc.; Cupertino, California USA) and Google Play (Google LLC; Mountain View, California USA) stores. Hypothesis/Problem: A systematic review of disaster response apps was originally completed in 2015; a follow-up review was completed here to evaluate trends and explore novel apps. Methods: A search of the Apple iTunes and Google Play stores was performed using the following terms obtained from PubMed (National Center for Biotechnology Information; Bethesda, Maryland USA) Medical Subject Headings Database: Emergency Preparedness; Emergency Responders; Disaster; Disaster Planning; Disaster Medicine; Bioterrorism; Chemical Terrorism; Hazardous Materials; and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA [Washington, DC USA]). After excluding any unrelated apps, a working list of apps was formed and categorized based on topics. Apps were categorized by intended user (first responders or the public) and sub-categorized by topic for discussion. Sub-categories included News/Information, Reference/Education, Weather/Natural Disasters, Travel/Navigation, and Communication/Reunification. Results: A search of the Apple iTunes store revealed 394 unique apps and was narrowed to 342 based on relevance to the field and availability on the iPhone. A search of the Google Play store yielded 645 unique applications and was narrowed to 634 based on relevance. Of note, 49 apps appeared in both app stores using the search terms. An aggregate 927 apps from the Apple iTunes and Google Play stores were then critically reviewed by the authors. Apps were sub-categorized based on intended audience, layperson or first responder, and sorted into one of five disaster response categories. Two apps were chosen for discussion from each of the five sub-categories. The highest quality apps were determined from each group based on relevance to emergency preparedness and disaster response, rating, and number of reviews. Conclusion: After comparisons with the 2015 article, many new apps have been developed and previously described apps have been updated, highlighting that this is a constantly changing field deserving of continued analysis and research.

Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Response: There’s An App for That

2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 486-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Bachmann ◽  
Nathan K. Jamison ◽  
Andrew Martin ◽  
Jose Delgado ◽  
Nicholas E. Kman
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Emergency Preparedness ◽  
Disaster Response ◽  
Value Relevance ◽  
Disaster Medicine ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Smartphone Applications ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Emergency Responders ◽  
Lay Public

AbstractIntroductionSmartphone applications (or apps) are becoming increasingly popular with emergency responders and health care providers, as well as the public as a whole. There are thousands of medical apps available for Smartphones and tablet computers, with more added each day. These include apps to view textbooks, guidelines, medication databases, medical calculators, and radiology images.Hypothesis/ProblemWith an ever expanding catalog of apps that relate to disaster medicine, it is hard for both the lay public and responders to know where to turn for effective Smartphone apps. A systematic review of these apps was conducted.MethodsA search of the Apple iTunes store (Version 12; Apple Inc.; Cupertino, California USA) was performed using the following terms obtained from the PubMed Medical Subject Headings Database: Emergency Preparedness, Emergency Responders, Disaster, Disaster Planning, Disaster Medicine, Bioterrorism, Chemical Terrorism, Hazardous Materials (HazMat), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). After excluding any unrelated apps, a working list of apps was formed and categorized based on topics. Apps were grouped based on applicability to responders, the lay public, or regional preparedness, and were then ranked based on iTunes user reviews, value, relevance to audience, and user interface.ResultsThis search revealed 683 applications and was narrowed to 219 based on relevance to the field. After grouping the apps as described above, and subsequently ranking them, the highest quality apps were determined from each group. The Community Emergency Response Teams and FEMA had the best apps for National Disaster Medical System responders. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had high-quality apps for emergency responders in a variety of fields. The National Library of Medicine’s Wireless Information System for Emergency Responders (WISER) app was an excellent app for HazMat responders. The American Red Cross had the most useful apps for natural disasters. Numerous valuable apps for public use, including alert apps, educational apps, and a well-made regional app, were also identified.ConclusionSmartphone applications are fast becoming essential to emergency responders and the lay public. Many high-quality apps existing in various price ranges and serving different populations were identified. This field is changing rapidly and it deserves continued analysis as more apps are developed.BachmannDJ, JamisonNK, MartinA, DelgadoJ, KmanNE. Emergency preparedness and disaster response: there’s an app for that. Prehosp Disaster Med. 2015;30(5):1–5.

Risks of Cardiovascular Disease and Beyond in Prescription of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manas A. Rane ◽  
Alexander Gitin ◽  
Benjamin Fiedler ◽  
Lawrence Fiedler ◽  
Charles H. Hennekens
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Relieve Pain ◽  
Gastrointestinal Side Effects ◽  
Inflammatory Drugs ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Introduction: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) include aspirin, naproxen, diclofenac, and ibuprofen, as well as selective cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors such as celecoxib. Their use is common, as well as their side effects which cause 100 000 hospitalizations and 17 000 deaths annually. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration strengthened its warning about the risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD) attributed to nonaspirin NSAIDs. Methods: When the sample size is large, randomization provides control of confounding not possible to achieve with any observational study. Further, observational studies and, especially, claims data have inherent confounding by indication larger than the small to moderate effects being sought. Results: While trials are necessary, they must be of sufficient size and duration and achieve high compliance and follow-up. Until then, clinicians should remain uncertain about benefits and risks of these drugs. Conclusions: Since the totality of evidence remains incomplete, health-care providers should consider all these aforementioned benefits and risks, both CVD and beyond, in deciding whether and, if so, which, NSAID to prescribe. The factors in the decision of whether and, if so, which NSAID to prescribe for relief of pain from inflammatory arthritis should not be limited to risks of CVD or gastrointestinal side effects but should also include potential benefits including improvements in overall quality of life resulting from decreases in pain or impairment from musculoskeletal pain syndromes. The judicious individual clinical decision-making about the prescription of NSAIDs to relieve pain based on all these considerations has the potential to do much more good than harm.

Consent, Refusal, and Waivers in Patient-Centered Dysphagia Care: Using Law, Ethics, and Evidence to Guide Clinical Practice

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 453-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Horner ◽  
Maria Modayil ◽  
Laura Roche Chapman ◽  
An Dinh
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Patient Centered ◽  
Legal Advice ◽  
Medical Context

PurposeWhen patients refuse medical or rehabilitation procedures, waivers of liability have been used to bar future lawsuits. The purpose of this tutorial is to review the myriad issues surrounding consent, refusal, and waivers. The larger goal is to invigorate clinical practice by providing clinicians with knowledge of ethics and law. This tutorial is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.MethodThe authors use a hypothetical case of a “noncompliant” individual under the care of an interdisciplinary neurorehabilitation team to illuminate the ethical and legal features of the patient–practitioner relationship; the elements of clinical decision-making capacity; the duty of disclosure and the right of informed consent or informed refusal; and the relationship among noncompliance, defensive practices, and iatrogenic harm. We explore the legal question of whether waivers of liability in the medical context are enforceable or unenforceable as a matter of public policy.ConclusionsSpeech-language pathologists, among other health care providers, have fiduciary and other ethical and legal obligations to patients. Because waivers try to shift liability for substandard care from health care providers to patients, courts usually find waivers of liability in the medical context unenforceable as a matter of public policy.

scholarly journals The difference between a clinical technician and clinical practitioner is in the scope of practice: the need for a bioscience understanding in paramedicine

2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 541-545
Author(s):  
Joseph A. Rathner ◽  
Christine Kettle
Keyword(s):  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Allied Health ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Complex Case ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Anatomy And Physiology ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
The Difference

“Only teach me what I need to know!” This commonly heard refrain is often spoken by allied health students while studying preclinical sciences (physiology, anatomy, pharmacology). Here we use a clinical scenario undertaken by second-year Bachelor of Paramedic Practice students of acute coronary syndrome to demonstrate the difference in clinical decision making when using a clinical reasoning approach to treatment rather than relying exclusively on a practice guidelines approach. We hope to demonstrate that understanding basic bioscience concepts, such as the Frank-Starling mechanism and the anatomy and physiology of the autonomic nervous system, are key to providing good clinical care in response to ambiguous patient symptoms. Students who understand these concepts underlying their patient care guideline will make better clinical decisions and better provide quality of care than students who follow the guideline exclusively. We aim this as a practical demonstration of the value of detailed understanding of human bioscience in allied health education. As health care providers transition from “technician” to “practitioner,” the key distinguishing feature of the role is the ability to practice independently, using “best judgment” rather than clinical guidelines (alone). Evidence suggests that complex case management requires detailed bioscience understanding.

mHealth in clinical decision-making: A systematic literature review (Preprint)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amandeep Dhir
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Rigorous Approach ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Mhealth Apps

UNSTRUCTURED A large number of mHealth apps are available nowadays for patients and health care providers. Many of those apps are designed specifically for clinical decision making (CDM). Despite their proliferation, limited studies have examined the utilization and effectiveness of these apps. The current study undertakes a systematic review to organize and synthesize the extant literature on mHealth for CDM in all resource settings. A thorough search of databases resulted in a preliminary list of 1,313 titles and abstracts, of which 1,107 were excluded as they were either duplicates or irrelevant to the scope of the study. Thereafter, full-text screening of the remaining 206 articles was performed, and 175 were excluded on the basis of pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria. This rigorous approach resulted in the identification of 31 studies for inclusion in the review. The utilization of mHealth for CDM appears to have pervaded almost all health care settings, as demonstrated by the insights gleaned from the review of the prior studies in the domain. However, the evidence of effectiveness is still limited and unreliable, which underscores the existence of a paucity of accumulated knowledge that, in turn, invites interesting opportunities for future research.

Pitfalls Associated With Antibiograms

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 319-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward H. Eiland ◽  
Christopher Ryan Dunne ◽  
William Lindgren
Keyword(s):  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Bacterial Resistance ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test ◽  
Critical Care Units ◽  
Correct Analysis

An accurate, appropriately collated antibiogram represents an integral resource for health care providers when assessing bacterial resistance and guiding antimicrobial selection and formulary decisions. Interpretation of bacterial susceptibility statistics is problematic yet frequent and unrecognized pitfalls may be avoided by following the M39-A2 guidelines to ensure correct analysis and presentation of cumulative antimicrobial susceptibility test data. This review addresses guideline recommendations related to antibiogram development, CLSI breakpoint interpretation, antimicrobial inclusion decisions, and the avoidance of duplicate and surveillance isolates. Unit-specific antibiograms in critical care units is encouraged for differentiation between hospital-wide ecology and these specific areas harboring more resistant pathogens. Antibiograms cannot track the emergence of microbial resistance during therapy and discrepancies exist between automated microbiology surveillance systems and their agreement with manual surveillance methods. When striving to improve overall patient outcomes, the use of a well-produced and disseminated antibiogram helps guide clinical decision making for patients requiring antimicrobial therapy.

Alternative Medicine and Multiple Sclerosis: An Objective Review from an American Perspective

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 15-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allen C. Bowling ◽  
Ragaa Ibrahim ◽  
Thomas M. Stewart
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Alternative Medicine ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
The United States ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
American Perspective ◽  
Conventional Medical Therapy

Abstract The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), or unconventional medicine, may be challenging for health care providers in the United States. There are several definitions of CAM, and therapies that are considered alternative in one country may be conventional in other countries. Unconventional medical practices may be used instead of, or in addition to, conventional medical therapy. It may be difficult for people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to obtain reliable MS-relevant CAM information, and there may be conflicts between the values of patients and those of health care providers. These issues may create problems in the clinical decision-making process. The relevance to MS of some commonly used CAM therapies is discussed: herbal medicine, vitamins and minerals, marijuana, and a histamine and caffeine transdermal gel patch. Current information about the efficacy and safety of CAM therapies is extremely variable. Some therapies appear promising, others are unsafe or ineffective, and nearly all need to be studied further.

scholarly journals MORE ENABLING APPROACH: A CHALLENGE FOR THE PRACTITIONERS- A CRITICAL REVIEW

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-10
Author(s):  
Amna Aamir Khan ◽  
Sumaira Imran Farooqui
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Activity Limitation ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Participation Restriction

The multidisciplinary teams of today are working in-collaboration and as one unit to assess, set goals, evaluate and provide reliable interventions to the patients/client. The essence of conceptual framework of ICF provides an opportunity to achieve the common goals of activity limitation and participation restriction by adapting a holistic model of rehabilitation encompassing the psychological, physical and the emotional needs with the advent of new techniques and modernized technologies. The new enabling approach is challenge faced by the health care providers where patient preferences, empowerment and health related quality of life are most essential. The review will provide a critical analysis on the barriers faced by the practitioner especially during clinical decision making. Psychosocial perspectives of the client that is the most ignored area is also emphasized in the review and also motivational aspects of the patients in promoting the evidence based practice and clinical decision making and ultimately focusing on the enablement of the disabled. KEYWORDS Enabling Approach, Evidence Based Practice, HRQoL, Clinical Decision Making, Psychological, Disability, Activity Limitation, Participation Restriction

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document