No abstract

This study describes the detection, mitigation, and analysis of a large cluster of SARS-CoV-2 infections in an acute care hospital with mature infection control policies and discusses insights that may inform additional measures to protect patients and staff.

Currently, there is wide variation in the resources, capabilities, and programs used to support and coordinate system-level emergency preparedness among academic health systems. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2018;12:574-577).

No abstract

should be made to develop and standardize minimum fitness standards for responders. By mitigating the risk of illness or injury to disaster responders, the likelihood of mission success and provider wellness can be increased. Methods: Hazard vulnerability analysis instruments were identified using a standardized online search technique. For each instrument, we compare the hazards identified for analysis, the method of determining probability, magnitude, and mitigation for each hazard, as well as the method used to determine risk using qualitative methodology.Results: This study is in progress, with results expected by December 2016. Conclusion:The study is currently ongoing. We anticipate that instruments will vary significantly in the specific threats assessed, calculation of probability, and measure of severity. Relative strength and weaknesses of different instruments will be highlighted. It is of concern that the hazard vulnerability analysis of hospitals in the United States may be skewed by the specific instrument chosen, and that no recommendations currently exist to guide the efforts of emergency managers. Our hope is that this review of available instruments will lead to further research into best practices, resulting in the standardization of the hazard vulnerability analysis of hospitals in the United States.