Upload
trandung
View
222
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Is your MCI plan ready for take-off? Lessons From Asiana 214
Clement Yeh MDMedical Director
San Francisco Fire DepartmentSan Francisco Department of Emergency Management
UCSF Department of Emergency Medicine
Disclaimer
“The opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the authors and may not reflect the official analyses or opinions of the San Francisco Fire Department, American Medical Response, San Francisco Department of Emergency Management, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco City & County, County of San Mateo, San Mateo County EMSA or the National Transportation Safety Board.”
Overview & Objectives
• Incident Overview
• Melding of MCI Plans
• Considerations for change in your area
• Pediatric considerations
Take Home Points
• Make Disasters “Normal”
• Plans + Planning + Practice
• Interoperability Challenges
• Overall System Management
Mass Casualty Transport
• Ambulance Bus
• 15 beds + 10 seated
• 26 seated
• MCI/Evacuation
• Fireground rehab
• Mass gathering medical care
Incident Timeline
1132 SF Dispatch Notified of Crash1134 Initial Dispatch1134 First Alarm Struck1140 Yellow Alert Declared 1145 First SFFD Units On-Scene1146 Second Alarm Struck1147 Red Alert Declared, First Amb On Scene, IC Established1151 Third Alarm Struck1159 Modified Response Declared1215 Passenger Count & Manifest Reported1259 All Patients transported from tarmac1917 IC Closes Incident
1129 Dispatch Notified of Crash1130 Dispatch of Level 1 MCI1130 Activation of EMSystems1130 First Amb On-Scene (AMR NICU Unit)1134 First 911 Amb On-Scene1137 Level 8 MCI Requested AMR Supervisor1142/5 SMC EMSA On-Call Notified1304 All Passengers/Crew Off Tarmac1326 SMC 911 Ambulances Released to System1338 Ground Amb Coordinator; declared sufficient ground transport resources on-scene1746 EMS Branch Secured
City & County of SF San Mateo County
Communications
• Language barriers
• Instantaneous
• Comm overload should be expected
• Mitigating factors
• Interpreters
• Redundancy
• Fallback plans
Patient Characteristics
• 307 on board
• 291 Passengers
• 16 Crew
• 175+ patients transported to area hospitals
Patient Distribution
• Language resources
• Reunification
• Special populations
• Trauma
• Burns
• Pediatrics
Patient Distribution: Counties
50%
16%
32%
1%
(88)
(2)
San Francisco
Eden
Stanford
(57)
San Mateo
(29)
Patient Distribution: Hospitals
• Stanford: 56
• SFGH: 53
• Mills Peninsula: 14
• UCSF: 14
• Kaiser Redwood City: 10
• CPMC (all campuses): 9
• Kaiser San Francisco: 5
• St. Francis: 7
• Sequoia Hospital: 5
• St. Mary’s: 4
• Eden: 2
Patient Distribution: Timeline (SFGH)
• 1300 First Wave:
10 patients: 5 critical, 5 serious
• 1600 Second Wave:
17 patients: critical to good condition
• 1700-1900 Third & Fourth Wave
25 patients
• Sunday 2100: 5th Wave
9 patients
• Monday: 6th Wave
4 patients, all children
SF System Impact
• UHU = Utilization/ Units x Staffed Hours
• Goal Transport UHU = 0.35 - 0.44
• SF 2013 YTD UHU = 0.38 (SD 0.04)
• SF 2013 Saturdays UHU = 0.40 (SD 0.04)
• Saturday 7/6/13 UHU = 0.41 0
0.125
0.25
0.375
0.5
Goal YTD Sat 7/6/13
0.4 0.38 0.400.41
San Mateo 911 System Impact
7 of 16 911 Ambulances Sent to Crash
AMR Surge Plan and MCI PlansInter-Facility Surge UnitIn County Mutual Aid South SF FireInter-Facility BLSInter-Facility Network Providers Special Operations Team Call BackCorporate Resources
Response Time Compliance 92.1%