BACKGROUND: Injuries caused by emergencies and accidents are increasing in the world. To prioritise patients to provide them with proper services and to optimally use the resources and facilities of the medical centres during accidents, the use of triage systems, which are one of the key principles of accident management, seems essential. AIM: This study is an attempt to identify available triage systems and compare the differences and similarities of the standards of these systems during emergencies and disasters through a review study. METHODS: This study was conducted through a review of the triage systems used in emergencies and disasters throughout the world. Accordingly, all articles published between 1990 and 2018 in both English and Persian journals were searched based on several keywords including Triage, Disaster, Mass Casualty Incidents, in the Medlib, Scopus, Web of Science, Pubmed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google scholar, Irandoc, Magiran, Iranmedex, and SID databases in isolation and in combination using both and/ or conjunctions. RESULTS: Based on the search done in these databases, twenty different systems were identified in the primary adult triage field including START, Homebush triage Standard, Sieve, Care Flight, STM, Military, CESIRA Protocol, MASS, Revers, CBRN Triage, Burn Triage, META Triage, Mass Gathering Triage, SwiFT Triage, MPTT, TEWS Triage, Medical Triage, SALT, mSTART and ASAV. There were two primary triage systems including Jump START and PTT for children, and also two secondary triage systems encompassing SAVE and Sort identified in this respect. ESI and CRAMS were two other cases distinguished for hospital triage systems. CONCLUSION: There are divergent triage systems in the world, but there is no general and universal agreement on how patients and injured people should be triaged. Accordingly, these systems may be designed based on such criteria as vital signs, patient's major problems, or the resources and facilities needed to respond to patients’ needs. To date, no triage system has been known as superior, specifically about the patients’ clinical outcomes, improvement of the scene management or allocation of the resources compared to other systems. Thus, it is recommended that different countries such as Iran design their triage model for emergencies and disasters by their native conditions, resources and relief forces.

Objective: Identification of hospital preparedness challenges against biological events such as COVID-19 is essential to improve dynamics, quality and business continuity confidence in the health system. Accordingly, the purpose of the present study is to evaluate the challenges of hospital preparedness in biological events. Methods: This study employed a qualitative method using content analysis in which 20 healthcare managers and experts who are experienced in biological events were selected through purposeful sampling. The data collection was done through semi-structured interviews, which continued until data saturation. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis as well as the Landman and Graneheim Approach. Results: Six main concepts (training and practice, resource management, safety and health, patient management, risk communication, and laboratory and surveillance) and 14 sub-concepts were extracted on hospital preparedness challenges in biological events through analyzing interviews. Conclusions: The present study indicated that the health system of the country faces many challenges in response to biological events and threats. Moreover, study participants indicated that Iranian hospitals were not prepared for biological events. It is recommended to design preparedness plans of hospitals based on preparedness standards for biological events. In addition, comprehensive measures are required to enhance their capacity to respond to biological emergencies.

Introduction:The use of triage systems is one of the most important measures in response to mass-casualty incidents (MCIs) caused by emergencies and disasters. In these systems, certain principles and criteria must be considered that can be achieved with a lack of resources. Accordingly, the present study was conducted as a systematic review to explore the principles of triage systems in emergencies and disasters world-wide.Methods:The present study was conducted as a systematic review of the principles of triage in emergencies and disasters. All papers published from 2000 through 2019 were extracted from the Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases. The search for the articles was conducted by two trained researchers independently.Results:The classification and prioritization of the injured people, the speed, and the accuracy of the performance were considered as the main principles of triage. In certain circumstances, including chemical, biological, radiation, and nuclear (CBRN) incidents, certain principles must be considered in addition to the principles of the triage based on traumatic events. Usually in triage systems, the classification of the injured people is done using color labeling. The short duration of the triage and its accuracy are important for the survival of the injured individuals. The optimal use of available resources to protect the lives of more casualties is one of the important principles of triage systems and does not conflict with equity in health.Conclusion:The design of the principles of triage in triage systems is based on scientific studies and theories in which attempts have been made to correctly classify the injured people with the maximum correctness and in the least amount of time to maintain the survival of the injured people and to achieve the most desirable level of health. It is suggested that all countries adopt a suitable and context-bond model of triage in accordance with all these principles, or to propose a new model for the triage of injured patients, particularly for hospitals in emergencies and disasters.

Acceptance and willingness to receive the vaccine are among the main factors in the success or failure of a health system in implementing the vaccination program. The present study was conducted in Tehran, the political and economic capital of Iran, to determine the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine and identify its associated factors, and explain the most important barriers and acceptance strategies for vaccination. This research was a concurrent quantitative and qualitative mixed-method study. In the quantitative part, 1200 individuals aged more than 18 years were selected from the households in 22 districts of Tehran City, with a multistage stratified cluster sampling method. Two questionnaires were used to evaluate the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine and vaccine acceptance determinants. The qualitative content analysis method addressed the influencing factors, as well as challenges and strategies related to the acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine in four groups of Tehran inhabitants: the elderly, people with underlying diseases, healthcare workers, and the general population. The related data were simultaneously collected by applying in-depth semi-structural interviews and a data analysis process. Furthermore, we used the Graneheim and Lundman method for data analysis. We analyzed the data of 1200 people with a mean (SD) age of 46.4 (11.1) years, and approximately 58% of them were men. The vaccine acceptance was 83.6% (95% CI: 81.3–85.9). Among those who welcomed vaccination, 58% preferred the imported vaccines, 25% the Iranian ones, and 17% both. There was a significant association between the variables of age (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.72, 95% CI: 1.01–2.93), being single (AOR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.41–0.91), moderate pharmacotherapy adherence (AOR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.4–0.85), and the willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccine. Qualitative study after interviewing 45 people from four study groups showed an insufficient social trust in healthcare system officials, pharmaceutical and vaccine production companies; distrust in the effectiveness of the vaccines, concerns about the vaccine adverse effects, being tracked by microchips after vaccination, traditional anti-vaccination movements, the feeling the inessentiality of vaccination, and uncertainty about the fair distribution of the vaccine. These concerns were the main challenges addressed by the study groups. A good proportion of Tehran residents reported their willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Additionally, they expressed their critical concerns, such as insufficient trust in the healthcare system, vaccine safeties, and adverse effects that were the significant barriers to vaccine acceptance. It seems that conflicts raised by the shortage of vaccines and their import due to the sanctions have led to intense desire and demand in the general population, and especially the elderly, for vaccination. Besides, vaccination phobia in some individuals requires further investigations.

Background: Disasters are increasing all over the world. Iran, is one of the high-risk countries in this regard; so it is unavoidable to prepare hospitals as vital centers when disasters happen. This study aimed to evaluation the hospital preparedness based on previous studies in Iran. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis by browsing through all articles published since 2006 to 2017, in English and Persian both languages were designed. Databases that we searched to, include Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Medlib, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Internationally and SID, Irandoc and Magiran, domestically. Two expert researchers investigated separately. Researchers used random and fixed effect models in the meta-analysis. Moreover, random and fixed effects model and meta-regression tests were applied by using STATA ver. 11. The P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Twenty-five studies with a sample size of 181 hospitals were introduced to the process of metaanalysis. Iranian hospital preparedness is 53%, totally, that is moderate. Preparedness in different categories is as follows: emergency services 62%, communication 57%, security 54%, education 57%, logistic 65%, human resources 52%, Management and command 64%, reception 43%, transfer and evacuation 44%, traffic 47%, non-structural safety 57%, and structural safety 49%. Conclusion: Hospital preparedness is moderate in Iran. Optimal management of existing resources and the use of Update technologies in the field of hospital services be directed towards improving the preparedness of hospitals for disasters.