scholarly journals Planning Considerations and Lessons Learned From a COVID-19 Mass Community Vaccination Center

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Fischl ◽  
Andrew T Patterson ◽  
Joseph Baxter ◽  
James Watson ◽  
Jesse Hemsworth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Air Force ◽  
Department Of Defense ◽  
Vaccination Campaign ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Pandemic Preparedness ◽  
Equipment And Supplies ◽  
Lead Agency ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Dose Vaccine

ABSTRACT The emergency use authorization for multiple coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines came at a pivotal time for the USA. In January 2021, the country exceeded 400,000 deaths from COVID-19. The USA aimed to quickly distribute and administer the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, with bright prospects for an additional emergency use authorization for Johnson and Johnson/Janssen’s single-dose vaccine on the horizon. Part of the National Strategy for COVID-19 Response and Pandemic Preparedness was to “mount a safe, effective, comprehensive vaccination campaign” so the administration set a goal to have 100 million fully vaccinated citizens after the first 100 days in office. In order to fuel the rapid administration of vaccines, the Department of Health and Human Services was tasked to stand up new, federally supported Community Vaccination Centers across the country. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was the lead agency entrusted to expedite financial assistance, allocate federal equipment and supplies, and deploy federal personnel to states, tribes, territories, and other eligible applicants for vaccination efforts. Early in the process of staffing sites, FEMA recognized the need to bolster the efforts with active duty military personnel and asked for manning assistance from the Department of Defense. As a result, 222 U.S. Air Force personnel were tasked with supporting the FEMA COVID-19 vaccination operations at NRG stadium, Houston, Texas. This reflection aims to cover the lessons learned and provide meaningful insight for future mass medical operations.

Burn Mass Casualty Management: Lessons Learned

1985 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 153 ◽  
Author(s):  
William F. McManus
Keyword(s):  
Air Force ◽  
Mass Casualty ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Inhalation Therapy ◽  
Equipment And Supplies ◽  
Us Army ◽  
Quality Patient Care ◽  
Us Air Force ◽  
The Us

Successful management of a mass casualty situation involving 45 injured marines following a fire in Japan demonstrates the important principles of triage, patient movement, quality patient care, logistics, communication and medical direction.Following the accident, the US Army Institute of Surgical Research assembled a burn team consisting of three surgeons, three nurses, one microbiologist and eleven clinical specialists (three of whom were inhalation therapy technicians) and the equipment and supplies necessary to treat and transport these patients. The US Air Force Military Airlift Command transported the team and equipment to Japan in a C–141 Starlifter Medevac plane and pre-positioned a second C–141 in Japan for the return flight. Additional ventilators and supplies were mobilized from Japan, Okinawa, the Philippines and Alaska.

The ethics of pandemic preparedness revisited - autonomy, quarantine, transferability and trust

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
P Schröder-Bäck ◽  
T Schloemer ◽  
K Martakis ◽  
C Brall
Keyword(s):  
Crisis Management ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Pandemic Preparedness ◽  
Ethical Aspects ◽  
Outbreak Management ◽  
Ethics Framework ◽  
Ethical Point

Abstract Background The outbreak of SARS in 2002 lead to a public health ethics discourse. The crisis management of that time was ethically analysed and lessons to be learned discussed. Scholarship and WHO, among others, developed an ethics of pandemic preparedness. The current “corona crisis” also faces us with ethical challenges. This presentation is comparing the two crises from an ethical point of view and a focus on Europe. Methods An ethics framework for pandemic preparedness (Schröder et al. 2006 and Schröder-Bäck 2014) is used to make a synopsis of ethical issues. Ethical aspects of 2002 and 2020 that were discussed in the literature and in the media are compared. For 2020, the focus is on interventions in Italy, Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Results Topics that emerged from the 2002 crisis were, among others, revolving around aspects of stigmatisation and fair distribution of scarce resources (esp. vaccines, antivirals). Currently, most urgent and ethically challenging aspects relate to social distancing vs. autonomy: Isolation and quarantine are handled differently across Europe and the EU. Questions of transferability of such interventions prevail. Contexts vary vertically over time (2002 vs. 2020) and horizontally (e.g. between Italy and Germany at the same time). Furthermore, trust in authorities, media and health information is a key issue. Conclusions Ethical aspects are key for good pandemic preparedness and management. The context of the crises between 2002 and 2020 has slightly changed, also based on “lessons learned” from 2002. This has implications on ethical issues that are being discussed. New lessons will have to be learned from the 2020 crisis. Key messages Pandemic preparedness and outbreak management entail many ethical tensions that need to be addressed. Currently, questions of trust and transferability are key to the crisis management, further ethical issues could still emerge.

scholarly journals Older Adults and Opioid Education: Lessons Learned From Experiences in Rural Arkansas

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 54-54
Author(s):  
Robin McAtee ◽  
Leah Tobey ◽  
Corey Hayes ◽  
Laura Spradley ◽  
Sajni Kumpuris
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Pain Management ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Term Treatment ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Farm Bureau ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Agricultural Areas

Abstract Nearly one-third of all Medicare participants were prescribed an opioid by their physician in 2015 (AARP, 2017) and in 2017, Arkansas had the 2nd highest opioid prescribing rate in the nation (CDC, 2019). Approaching older adults (OA) about opioids and pain management can be a sensitive topic. Educating and altering long-term treatment with opioids is especially challenging in rural areas where literacy, especially health literacy, is suboptimal. The Arkansas Geriatric Education Collaborative (AGEC) is a HRSA Geriatric Workforce Enhancement Program with an objective to improve health outcomes including an emphasis to decrease the misuse and abuse of opioids among older Arkansans. To address this crisis, the AGEC partnered with local leaders such as the AR Drug Director, academia, Department of Health and Human Services, and multiple community based organizations to create age-tailored educational programs. Unique aspects of approaching and educating rural OA about opioids and pain management will be reviewed. Outcomes will be discussed such as their lack of knowledge about: what is an opioid, why they were prescribed, and what are viable alternatives. Also discussed will be lessons learned that resulted in more effective methods of reaching and teaching rural OA. Partnering with the AR Farm Bureau helped the AGEC reach 100’s of farmers in the extremely rural and mostly agricultural areas. Learning to not use the word opioid resulted in more participants and in a more positive attitude and outlook on attempts to change the culture of opioid use, misuse and abuse among older Arkansans.

scholarly journals Why Age and Aging Research Matters: A Chat With NIA Senior Leadership

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 825-825
Author(s):  
Marie Bernard
Keyword(s):  
Human Services ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Health Department ◽  
National Institutes Of Health ◽  
Senior Leadership ◽  
Aging Research ◽  
Research Directions ◽  
Lead Agency ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Significant Research

Abstract The National Institute on Aging (NIA) at the National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, is the federally designated lead agency on aging research, and has supported significant research on aging as a life-long process. In the last five years, NIA experienced a tripling of its budget. Although much of this funding is targeted to Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and AD related dementias (ADRD) research, there was an increase in funds allocated to non-AD research in keeping with the overall growth of NIH. This symposium will provide a forum for exploration of the implications of the budget increases for the general research community. It will involve NIA’s senior staff discussing research priorities and programs supported by the Institute. A question-and-answer session will follow brief introductory remarks on current funding and future priorities and research directions of NIA.

Reflecting or ruminating: listening to the regrets of life science leaders

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Mary Meldrum
Keyword(s):  
Chief Executive Officers ◽  
Life Science ◽  
Negative Emotion ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
Positive Influence ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Executive Officers

PurposeThe overwhelming frequency of failure in trying to bring a safe and effective biotech, pharmaceutical or medical device product to market is truly astounding. This research synthesizes industry leaders' insights on lessons learned from reflecting on professional disappointments.Design/methodology/approachThis research used a qualitative approach to learning from the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), Chief Scientific Officers (CSOs) and Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) of the most successful life science firms in the USA. A total of 45 industry leaders were interviewed regarding their lingering regrets about their career misadventures.FindingsRegrets were unavoidable because there were opportunity costs for every choice each leader made. Commentary about wisdom gained comprised themes regarding valuable time lost, strategies that could have been enacted, products that failed and essential personnel who were not managed optimally. Contrary to expectations, there was little mention of money that was squandered.Originality/valueNot felt as a solely negative emotion, regrets were recognized by these leaders as a potentially positive influence on their future decisions. Not felt as a solely negative emotion, regret was recognized by these leaders as a potentially positive influence on their future decisions. This exploratory study suggests that learning from retrospective and anticipated regrets benefits life science leaders in gaining clarity of thought regarding their current business challenges. Because prior research on the value of psychological regrets has mostly relied on limited samples, this inquiry contributes a new vantage point by examining a unique population of senior business leaders, thus providing broader applicability to the organizational literature.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document